"No no, the Conservatives just suffered a 34% swing against them, but this is in no way bad news"
Brilliant.
Reading too much into a midterm by-election is a bit like reading too much into what Ant and Dec say: Its a joke.
What's actually bad news is that Burns is out for 4.
So you actually think it isn't bad news that the Tories lost this?
I actually don't think its news at all.
Lib Dems win by-election in midterm is up there with "sun rose in the East" or "it snowed in winter" as news.
You, on November 10th: Win by one vote: good news. Lose by one vote: bad news.
It's just so damn easy to catch you spouting your nonsense. You're so addicted to spin, you don't know which way you're pointing from one day to the next.
Would you take a job spinning for Boris? If only half his posts are crap that's still 33,000 posts!
I remember the day Harold Wilson announced his resignation. It took everyone by surprise, although it was subsequently revealed that he'd been diagnosed with the early stages of dementia. It was, nevertheless, a timely decision made of his own volition. Every subsequent PM has been bundled out of office by either the electorate or by their loyal supporters, kicking and squealing all the way. Johnson could have retired in splendour six months ago to a lucrative career of journalism and stand-up entertainment, but now it's too late. It isn't just political power evaporating like morning dew, but his future earning potential, too.
It would be very hard to see the Tories losing the next general election if they hadn't first suffered some bad by-election defeats. So some of the necessary conditions for such a defeat are being put in place.
A long way to go still, and the position is still recoverable.
How?
If the Tories could simply stop inflicting damage on themselves it would be a good start.
Johnson needs to find a capable person to run his government for him, or else the Tories need to find a different PM who can.
The opposition is not so formidable that the government cannot recover. But someone in government has to act.
Johnson is incapable of personal development. He cannot improve.
Johnson doesn't need to change. He can continue as an erratic, but charming, frontman, provided he has someone to do the real work in the background. Unlike most leaders I don't get the impression that Johnson particularly cares about being told what to do, as long as it ends up being popular and he can claim the credit for it.
Or else the Tory party could depose Johnson.
Both options would be an improvement on the status quo.
Boris has no-one willing to do the real work in the background.
The people who did that in the past were Cummings and Gove. Neither of them are going to do it a second time.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
They were setup to get smashed by Delta again this winter. If they can get a quick wave of Omicron in to displace it then it might not be so terrible for them.
Problem is when the Tories ousted 3 times election winner Maggie after Eastbourne they then lost 3 out of 4 of the following general elections. Boris is the Tories biggest general election winner since Thatcher.
At most if they removed Boris and replaced him with say Sunak they might be able to scrape one more win, just but removing election winners normally does not work longer term. See also how Labour has lost 4 consecutive general elections since Blair was pushed out earlier than he wanted by Brownites in 2007. Brown got a short bounce but it was all downhill from there
Boris WAS the biggest election winner since Thatch. But he's become a liability and a loser I'm afraid.
As Thatcher was by 1990.
Nevertheless a poor non-showing by the Yorkshire Party? You have to be in it to win it....
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
It was a spectacular loss but for once I agree with you. They won't trigger a leadership contest with the pandemic still raging so he's safe for now. The summer is when he'd be ousted and I rate that a 33% chance. Therefore he should be odds against to go in 2022 not odds on. The weight of sentiment and money says otherwise but I'm digging in. I've topped up again. Now long of him to still be PM at the next Tory Party Conf at an average 1.9. It will be 1.4 by March imo.
Getting a teeny bit nervous, though, given how much I've now got staked. It could be I'm misreading things. Perhaps it's (finally!) become too obvious to too many people, insiders and public alike, that this tawdry individual cannot do the job, should never have had the job, and should be relieved of it without the need to first have a general election. In which case, hats off, a belated call but a great call.
That is a fantastically written article and explains well both why I liked Boris and why I want him out ASAP. This sums it up:
Those who were inspired by his manifesto of a “liberal Conservative” (his words) were most likely to back him for leader – and most likely to rebel against him on Tuesday. Not because they’re suddenly against him but because they have the courage of his (old) convictions.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
This is a big deal.
Sure, and that's what happened in the 1990s. Which is fine until (1) that tactical alliance comes apart and voters see Labour as the bigger threat - which happened under Brown and Corbyn - or (2) the Lib Dems lose their beige nothingness and have to take some policy decisions, which inevitably upsets some voters.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That is a fantastically written article and explains well both why I liked Boris and why I want him out ASAP. This sums it up:
Those who were inspired by his manifesto of a “liberal Conservative” (his words) were most likely to back him for leader – and most likely to rebel against him on Tuesday. Not because they’re suddenly against him but because they have the courage of his (old) convictions.
Who could have possibly imagined that unscrupulous nationalist politicians might not act in a liberal manner?
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
Good to see Germany desperately attempting to play catch up though given how far behind they are, and the reports of them running out of vaccines, I wouldn't be making any comparisons if I was you.
Note for @Leon on the Covid origins debate - the people you should be listening to are the scientists who look critically at the evidence put forward on both sides of the debate.
Here's the latest paper the natural origins proponents are excited about: https://twitter.com/MichaelWorobey/status/1471546513281019905 Wow. Huge development. SARS-related CoVs in bats in Europe just one mutation away from a polybasic furin cleavage at S1/S2. And these very bat samples might contain low-frequency variants *with* functional FCS.
And the response from the Bloom Lab: https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1471573160654880769 I'm agnostic on its various hypotheses about mechanisms of origin of furin-cleavage sites, but the part of this paper that suggests furin-cleavage site might be present in two of these SARSr-CoVs as a minor variant is embarrassingly bad science that shouldn't be amplified....
...So what this study should say is: we found some bat SARS-related CoVs that are just one or a few mutations away from having a furin cleavage site, but none of them actually have a furin cleavage site even as a minor variant. (6/n)
IOW, the finding is indeed interesting, and does provide some support for the possibility of a natural origin, but the authors of the paper have over-interpreted some of their results in a way which simply isn't justified.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
How long are you allowing for lead times? Recorded cases have been falling in Gauteng for 3 days, which means infections have been falling for at least 6 (and given how crap everyone wants to say RSA is, perhaps longer). Trend on hospitals suggests, unsurprisingly, they will not be going up much above where they are for the epicentre region.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
I agree with that. But without some electoral headlines, they will be ignored.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
This is a big deal.
Sure, and that's what happened in the 1990s. Which is fine until (1) that tactical alliance comes apart and voters see Labour as the bigger threat - which happened under Brown and Corbyn - or (2) the Lib Dems lose their beige nothingness and have to take some policy decisions, which inevitably upsets some voters.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
Absolutely - it was in their best interests for the Tories to get soundly beaten by the LDs. Under FPTP we can have a Tory government or a Labour government. Sometimes they need other parties to secure a majority but its definitely a Tory block vs a not-Tory block. Labour need LDs to take seats off the Tories which they cannot.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
That's true about the lag. But as a general point it'd be very scary and unexpected if this wave has a hozzie and death rate anywhere near previous ones because as a population we have considerably more resistance to serious illness via prior infection and vaccination.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Their death rate is not far off 4x ours at the moment, and we have a much higher share of the popilation boostered.
That's the problem with FBPE/The Citizens. They're so deep down the "Plague Island" rabbit hole that they're keen to hammer home anything that shows up those nasty British people, even if their actual argument is weaker than a soaking paper bag.
That is a fantastically written article and explains well both why I liked Boris and why I want him out ASAP. This sums it up:
Those who were inspired by his manifesto of a “liberal Conservative” (his words) were most likely to back him for leader – and most likely to rebel against him on Tuesday. Not because they’re suddenly against him but because they have the courage of his (old) convictions.
Priti Patel was appointed Home Secretary before the last election. Those who were inspired by his 'liberal conservatism' ought to have been disillusioned some time back.
An absolutely amazing result. I believe it does indeed herald a sea-change. If the tories don't ditch BoJo they will be hammered in 2024. They must realise this from their attempt to ditch Maggie when they did and then the Christchurch by-election in 1993, which presaged the sensational 1997 General Election.
Replacing Maggie with Major temporarily staunched the wound but it was ultimately temporary. The fiasco over the Black Wednesday crushed the tories for a generation, compounded as it was by the sleaze and ructions over Europe.
I believe this time it is far worse for the Conservatives. Why? Because in fact once we left the ERM in 1992 this country boomed in every other respect than Westminster sleaze. By contrast as we come into 2022, the indicators for us on almost every front are dire.
By almost replace Johnson but you won't win in 2024. The writing is now on the wall.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
This is a big deal.
Sure, and that's what happened in the 1990s. Which is fine until (1) that tactical alliance comes apart and voters see Labour as the bigger threat - which happened under Brown and Corbyn - or (2) the Lib Dems lose their beige nothingness and have to take some policy decisions, which inevitably upsets some voters.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
Absolutely - it was in their best interests for the Tories to get soundly beaten by the LDs. Under FPTP we can have a Tory government or a Labour government. Sometimes they need other parties to secure a majority but its definitely a Tory block vs a not-Tory block. Labour need LDs to take seats off the Tories which they cannot.
It was lovely to see Labour voters be tactical, and equally lovely that Ms Morgan thanked them for doing so.
That is a fantastically written article and explains well both why I liked Boris and why I want him out ASAP. This sums it up:
Those who were inspired by his manifesto of a “liberal Conservative” (his words) were most likely to back him for leader – and most likely to rebel against him on Tuesday. Not because they’re suddenly against him but because they have the courage of his (old) convictions.
Priti Patel was appointed Home Secretary before the last election. Those who were inspired by his 'liberal conservatism' ought to have been disillusioned some time back.
Home Secretary tend not to go to liberals, no matter what.
Priti Patel isn't as bad as David Cameron's Home Secretary at least.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
We've had high inflation for the past few decades, just the inflation has gone on housing costs benefiting those who own houses while putting anyone who doesn't in penury.
Why don't those on fixed incomes apply for a new job with a better income?
Good to see Germany desperately attempting to play catch up though given how far behind they are, and the reports of them running out of vaccines, I wouldn't be making any comparisons if I was you.
People are going to make the same stupid mistakes once again of ignoring timeliness when Germany inevitably passes our booster vaccination total. Quantity matters, and speed matters, but so does doing them sooner. Every day a person is unvaccinated is a day a person in unprotected, and the UK is many millions of days of protection ahead of almost all comparable countries.
And even given that I think the UK has been too slow. We need to figure out how to go far faster in case a really nasty variant occurs.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
Yes. I lose patience a bit with right-leaning commentators who sneer at the LibDems for being weathervanes, as if this is something unique among political parties.
Do you want to hazard a guess at how many Conservative council candidates ran in the local elections on the flagship national, Boris-backed Conservative policy of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods?
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Why isn't that being (more than) offset by patients who in previous waves would have needed oxygen, in this wave "just" needing [whatever is the treatment for people who don't quite need oxygen]?
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
Labour's vote fell to 7.7%, which is 6 points below what they got in 2001 when the Lib Dems won it.
The whole working together thing is a myth. Short of a full-on electoral pact where they don't contest some seats, it's up to the voters to decide how much they care about kicking out the Tories.
Not sure I understand your argument, but that graph is hugely encouraging that the Tories will lose the seat next time and a few Lab->Lib switch could easily make the difference. Let's hope so.
Anne Milton also stood and arguably split the anti Johnson vote. I would say Guildford is probably the Lib Dems most likely/certain gain next time even if they flop nationally and only gain 2/3 seats of the Tories.
This result is so bad for the Tories it feels more like a temper tantrum rather than a tectonic shift.
Put it another way, it feels like an angry wife hurling a teapot at the kitchen wall, rather than a wife calmly sitting down signing divorce papers.
The Tories can still win in 2024, not least because it is STILL very hard to see a route to a Labour majority, and voters will flinch at a shambolic, chaotic Lab-LD-Nat Coalition
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
If SA was suffering double the rate of ventilated patients from the previous Delta wave they had I would be telling you that the apocalypse was coming, we were all going to die and only Chinese style "weld the doors shut" could save us.
But they aren't. The data is laggy but not non-existent. I've looked at the previous several months of data and built a reporting lag model to estimate what today's figures will look like. By comparing with previous SA waves we reduce the uncertainty.
Covid is uncertain but it isn't unknowable.
I've been repeatedly accused of being a doom saying pessimist on this site (for the crime of pointing out other people's over optimistic predictions had been busted by reality) so I am now in the unique position of being accused of being too optimistic.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Why isn't that being (more than) offset by patients who in previous waves would have needed oxygen, in this wave "just" needing [whatever is the treatment for people who don't quite need oxygen]?
Because patients that just need bed rest instead of oxygen aren't being measured.
This result is so bad for the Tories it feels more like a temper tantrum rather than a tectonic shift.
Put it another way, it feels like an angry wife hurling a teapot at the kitchen wall, rather than a wife calmly sitting down signing divorce papers.
The Tories can still win in 2024, not least because it is STILL very hard to see a route to a Labour majority, and voters will flinch at a shambolic, chaotic Lab-LD-Nat Coalition
But, can the Tories win under Boris? Doubtful
The card the Tories cannot play is vote tory, avoid chaos.
Johnson is not yet in the (socially-distanced) Last Chance Saloon - I very much doubt there will a confidence vote - but he's staggering gracelessly towards it. A wipe-out at the May locals may be the trigger but even then I wouldn't be sure. My feeling as an old Tory hand is that he will still be PM this time next year.
Good to see Germany desperately attempting to play catch up though given how far behind they are, and the reports of them running out of vaccines, I wouldn't be making any comparisons if I was you.
People are going to make the same stupid mistakes once again of ignoring timeliness when Germany inevitably passes our booster vaccination total. Quantity matters, and speed matters, but so does doing them sooner. Every day a person is unvaccinated is a day a person in unprotected, and the UK is many millions of days of protection ahead of almost all comparable countries.
At this point is it inevitable that they will overtake our total per 100 people? We've only just got into fourth gear but with the acceleration we have we might still keep ahead.
Of course, right now it's a good thing that Germany is speeding along, they've got the message loud and clear, where as the US seems to still be on the 6 month wait prior to having a booster (although given they vaccinated quickly in the spring at a 3 week gap I imagine most have now reached the 6 months).
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
As per the original link in this discussion, the relative difference seen is consistent across all age groups, so I'm not sure the different age profile is a killer point when we're comparing RSA now to RSA 6 months ago with the same age profile.
In this country we're older but vastly better vaccinated - if they're not getting near their previous peaks, there is not yet a credible reason to believe we will get near ours.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
If Omicron hits China badly next year then inflation in the West will be horrendous. There would be shortages of everything, except I guess iron ore and coal.
People have been banging on for ages, even before the pandemic, about the strategic risk of relying so heavily on China, and you would have hoped that the early stages of the pandemic would have driven the lesson home to everyone else. Next year I fear that we will rue not taking steps earlier to reduce our economic reliance on imports from China.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Why isn't that being (more than) offset by patients who in previous waves would have needed oxygen, in this wave "just" needing [whatever is the treatment for people who don't quite need oxygen]?
Because Instead of 16% of the admissions needing Ventilation and 12% needing Oxygen it is 2.5% needing ventilation and 14% needing oxygen.
So 28% needing intervention has gone dow to 16.5% needing intervention.
So, a great deal of patients who would have needed Oxygen last time out don't need it at all this time.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how high inflation impacts wages.
After any initial wage increase, wages increases usually lag inflation so it's often the case people start to feel worse off and never quite catch up.
Good to see Germany desperately attempting to play catch up though given how far behind they are, and the reports of them running out of vaccines, I wouldn't be making any comparisons if I was you.
People are going to make the same stupid mistakes once again of ignoring timeliness when Germany inevitably passes our booster vaccination total. Quantity matters, and speed matters, but so does doing them sooner. Every day a person is unvaccinated is a day a person in unprotected, and the UK is many millions of days of protection ahead of almost all comparable countries.
And even given that I think the UK has been too slow. We need to figure out how to go far faster in case a really nasty variant occurs.
In meteorology they calculate a metric called "freezing degree days" and I would guess that you could do something similar in terms of vaccine protection days, or even better age-adjust the data and calculate age-adjusted vaccine protection days.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
As per the original link in this discussion, the relative difference seen is consistent across all age groups, so I'm not sure the different age profile is a killer point when we're comparing RSA now to RSA 6 months ago with the same age profile.
In this country we're older but vastly better vaccinated - if they're not getting near their previous peaks, there is not yet a credible reason to believe we will get near ours.
The only downside to that is that natural immunity might be better than vaccination-acquired immunity. Your body has been shown the whole virus, not just the spike protein from the original wild-type Covid
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how high inflation impacts wages.
After any initial wage increase, wages increases usually lag inflation so it's often the case people start to feel worse off and never quite catch up.
If you include house prices in inflation, which you should, then wages have lagged inflation and never caught up for decades now.
Only by using dodgy data that excluded costs from the data has inflation not been here for decades.
A return to some wage inflation would be a good thing for workers. It might be a bad thing for home owners on pensions, but they've had it all their own way for decades now.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
This is a big deal.
Sure, and that's what happened in the 1990s. Which is fine until (1) that tactical alliance comes apart and voters see Labour as the bigger threat - which happened under Brown and Corbyn - or (2) the Lib Dems lose their beige nothingness and have to take some policy decisions, which inevitably upsets some voters.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
LDs have been taught to be shy.
Blair was working with LDs in 1997, then threw them under the bus when he no longer needed them.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
As per the original link in this discussion, the relative difference seen is consistent across all age groups, so I'm not sure the different age profile is a killer point when we're comparing RSA now to RSA 6 months ago with the same age profile.
In this country we're older but vastly better vaccinated - if they're not getting near their previous peaks, there is not yet a credible reason to believe we will get near ours.
The only downside to that is that natural immunity might be better than vaccination-acquired immunity. Your body has been shown the whole virus, not just the spike protein from the original wild-type Covid
Natural immunity has a bit of a risk attached though, and with 10 days isolation and all you don't want particularly to find it (Unless you really don't want to see the in laws over christmas I suppose). Acquired immunity is available quite literally via a needle.
At this point is it inevitable that they will overtake our total per 100 people? We've only just got into fourth gear but with the acceleration we have we might still keep ahead.
Of course, right now it's a good thing that Germany is speeding along, they've got the message loud and clear, where as the US seems to still be on the 6 month wait prior to having a booster (although given they vaccinated quickly in the spring at a 3 week gap I imagine most have now reached the 6 months).
I don't know which country will hit the highest percentage of vaccinated and boosted, my point is simply that when you vaccinate matters at least as much as how fast you go and how many are jabbed. There is no point in delivering lots of vaccinations too late to save lives.
Johnson is not yet in the (socially-distanced) Last Chance Saloon - I very much doubt there will a confidence vote - but he's staggering gracelessly towards it. A wipe-out at the May locals may be the trigger but even then I wouldn't be sure. My feeling as an old Tory hand is that he will still be PM this time next year.
Do you think he should lead the Tories into the next GE?
If not, when would be the optimum time to replace him?
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
So the SA data is laggy and the SA population age profile doesn't match ours - yet people are still using it to justify their points of view.
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
As per the original link in this discussion, the relative difference seen is consistent across all age groups, so I'm not sure the different age profile is a killer point when we're comparing RSA now to RSA 6 months ago with the same age profile.
In this country we're older but vastly better vaccinated - if they're not getting near their previous peaks, there is not yet a credible reason to believe we will get near ours.
The only downside to that is that natural immunity might be better than vaccination-acquired immunity. Your body has been shown the whole virus, not just the spike protein from the original wild-type Covid
Natural immunity has a bit of a risk attached though, and with 10 days isolation and all you don't want particularly to find it (Unless you really don't want to see the in laws over christmas I suppose). Acquired immunity is available quite literally via a needle.
Indeed, but my point was that more South Africans have it than Brits.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
There is something very different between now and the 2010s. Labour and the Lib Dems are working together again and their voters are able to support each other to oust a Tory.
This is a big deal.
Sure, and that's what happened in the 1990s. Which is fine until (1) that tactical alliance comes apart and voters see Labour as the bigger threat - which happened under Brown and Corbyn - or (2) the Lib Dems lose their beige nothingness and have to take some policy decisions, which inevitably upsets some voters.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
There's a disconnect between the national GE type picture and North Shropshire. Polls say the 2019 Con vote is now as below ex DKs:
CON - 59% LAB - 8% REF - 7% LDs - 1%
So just 1% switching to the LDs.
NS goes back to the Cons at the general but what it does show is if Lab and LD voters are smart the Cons can be removed from office quite easily. The notion that Brexit has created for them a new 'values driven' base which is solid enough to make them hot favourites looks false to me now. Good news if true.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
I agree with that. But without some electoral headlines, they will be ignored.
They can generate headlines from policy positions. UKIP managed to do so, likewise the Greens - and that was from weaker political positions.
At the moment, even if they're not ignored, what is there for people to see with them?
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Why isn't that being (more than) offset by patients who in previous waves would have needed oxygen, in this wave "just" needing [whatever is the treatment for people who don't quite need oxygen]?
Because Instead of 16% of the admissions needing Ventilation and 12% needing Oxygen it is 2.5% needing ventilation and 14% needing oxygen.
So 28% needing intervention has gone dow to 16.5% needing intervention.
So, a great deal of patients who would have needed Oxygen last time out don't need it at all this time.
OK, thanks. So there's been a shift downwards in terms of intervention severity, across the board.
The Tories look tired and in need of a period in opposition. They need to decide if they are conservative or populist. It's hard to be both.
See Redwood this morning
He still think his brand of Brexit populism is Conservative.
Fukwit.
I could joke and say, he still thinks it's popular.
With inflation running hot, shortages in shops, and tax rises on the way, I think Brexit is going to turn out to be very unpopular. Not because Brexit was in fact the cause of these things (if Brexit is why prices are going up, how come inflation in the US is running at a similar amount and has equally as bad supply chain issues?) but because it can and will be blamed for these things.
It was said on here a while ago that if the economy goes bad, not many people will remember voting for Brexit. I do wonder if North Shropshire is the first sign of that.
A brexit-y seat going to the Lib Dems is definitely eyebrow-raising.
Inflation is rising in part because the economy is performing well.
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
I see you have moved on from the "inflation is transitory" to the "inflation is good" stage of the kubler-ross model. This has less to do with "why should my barista get a pay raise" and more, why are second hand cars selling for more than new ones, why are people on fixed incomes, savers, or people who cannot get a pay rise suffering? and much more harm to the macroeconomy besides.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
If Omicron hits China badly next year then inflation in the West will be horrendous. There would be shortages of everything, except I guess iron ore and coal.
People have been banging on for ages, even before the pandemic, about the strategic risk of relying so heavily on China, and you would have hoped that the early stages of the pandemic would have driven the lesson home to everyone else. Next year I fear that we will rue not taking steps earlier to reduce our economic reliance on imports from China.
This result is so bad for the Tories it feels more like a temper tantrum rather than a tectonic shift.
Put it another way, it feels like an angry wife hurling a teapot at the kitchen wall, rather than a wife calmly sitting down signing divorce papers.
The Tories can still win in 2024, not least because it is STILL very hard to see a route to a Labour majority, and voters will flinch at a shambolic, chaotic Lab-LD-Nat Coalition
But, can the Tories win under Boris? Doubtful
The card the Tories cannot play is vote tory, avoid chaos.
Yes, thank heavans we missed the "Coalition of Chaos" in 2015.
In meteorology they calculate a metric called "freezing degree days" and I would guess that you could do something similar in terms of vaccine protection days, or even better age-adjust the data and calculate age-adjusted vaccine protection days.
I'm sure such things exist, I doubt that any serious virologist or epidemiologist simply looks at the total of jabs done and think that that tells the story.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
Being all things to all people is to be nothing to everyone - and to then let many down as the impressions which had been given turn out to be false if contact has to be made with political reality, as it did in 2010 and as they were very fortunate it didn't in 2019.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is a superb corollary that gives me confidence in my statement (but I caveat everything I say about Covid in SA with the maxim that data is very laggy)
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
Why isn't that being (more than) offset by patients who in previous waves would have needed oxygen, in this wave "just" needing [whatever is the treatment for people who don't quite need oxygen]?
Because Instead of 16% of the admissions needing Ventilation and 12% needing Oxygen it is 2.5% needing ventilation and 14% needing oxygen.
So 28% needing intervention has gone dow to 16.5% needing intervention.
So, a great deal of patients who would have needed Oxygen last time out don't need it at all this time.
OK, thanks. So there's been a shift downwards in terms of intervention severity, across the board.
Yah, although just double checking my figures and it's 16% needing Oxygen now not just 14%. The point still stands, I just like to be exact about my figures.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
I don't agree. David Cameron won as a liberal Conservative. So I would argue (though others might disagree) did Boris.
Liberalism isn't unpopular.
A liberal Lib Dem party can still be a repository for protest votes, even while carrying the flag for Liberalism. The problem is that just being the former means you serve no purpose and the protestors just move on as they did in 2015 abandoning the Lib Dems to go to UKIP instead.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
No fair enough. I wasn't implying you were, so sorry if that's how it came across. There does seem to be a tendency to not believe more positive data. I suspect many are just wary of being burned, but there is accumulating evidence that Omicron outcomes are better than previous waves.
Labour want to keep Boris in place because #TeamStarmer thinks he will be easier to beat at the next general election. Thus spake Diane Abbott on yesterday's Spectator TV. She points to Keir Starmer always stopping short of asking Boris to resign. (Oh, and Andrew Neil is back.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-MMpiwoqvo&t=121s
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
If Omicron is indeed milder than delta that’s great news. But not necessarily great enough to avoid ‘the apocalypse’
Do we yet know if you can have omicron and delta simultaneously? I’ve seen that suggested, not yet seen it refuted. That would be truly awful
Hopefully just a horrible twist that never arrives. As we end another long, grisly year, the idea of things getting even worse is nearly unbearable
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
Being all things to all people is to be nothing to everyone - and to then let many down as the impressions which had been given turn out to be false if contact has to be made with political reality, as it did in 2010 and as they were very fortunate it didn't in 2019.
Precisely. If the Lib Dems aren't going to be a party for liberalism they might as well shut up shop and disband and join either the Tories or Labour.
Labour want to keep Boris in place because #TeamStarmer thinks he will be easier to beat at the next general election. Thus spake Diane Abbott on yesterday's Spectator TV. She points to Keir Starmer always stopping short of asking Boris to resign. (Oh, and Andrew Neil is back.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-MMpiwoqvo&t=121s
That may be Labour's approach, but it is stupid. It is like Man City making sure they only beat Chelsea by two goals so that Tuchel doesn't resign. It both overestimates the influence that anything Labour does would actually cause him to resign, it misses an opportunity to further reduce Boris' popularity, and it entirely forgets that by presenting Labour's strongest case for Boris' resignation, it not only undermines him, but benefits them and how they are perceived by the public.
I'm calling for Boris to resign and I'm a Tory, for heaven's sake.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
Mind you the Liberals have been the major party in Canada since WW2 but mainly by being social democrat and social liberals and the main party of the centre left, not by being classical liberals. Macron has done the same thing to a lesser extent in France with En Marche.
In Japan and Australia the opposite applies, the Liberals have essentially become conservatives and the main party of the centre right and frequently, in Japan usually, been in government. None of those nations have PR.
However I agree the support for a party which is conservative on economics but socially liberal, pure Liberal if you like, is not much more than 10% whatever voting system used. As the LDs discovered here in 2015 when they went from being socially liberal, social democrats in 2005 and 2010 when they got over 20% to classical liberals in the coalition and falling to below 10%
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
If Omicron is indeed milder than delta that’s great news. But not necessarily great enough to avoid ‘the apocalypse’
Do we yet know if you can have omicron and delta simultaneously? I’ve seen that suggested, not yet seen it refuted. That would be truly awful
Hopefully just a horrible twist that never arrives. As we end another long, grisly year, the idea of things getting even worse is nearly unbearable
Of course you can have both at the same time. The body would fight both. Once the immune response kicks in, you should be fine. Remember that often feeling shit is down to your bodies reaction not the virus, so I see little reason why two strains would make that worse. We encounter lots of stuff everyday.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
Mind you the Liberals have been the major party in Canada since WW2 but mainly by being social democrat and social liberals and the main party of the centre left, not by being classical liberals. Macron has done the same thing to a lesser extent in France with En Marche.
In Japan and Australia the opposite applies, the Liberals have essentially become conservatives and the main party of the centre right and frequently, in Japan usually, been in government. None of those nations have PR.
However I agree the support for a party which is conservative on economics but socially liberal, pure Liberal if you like, is not much more than 10% whatever voting system used. As the LDs discovered here in 2015 when they went from being socially liberal, social democrats in 2005 and 2010 when they got over 20% to classical liberals in the coalition and falling to below 10%
That's the Conservative Party whenever it wins elections in this country.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
If Omicron is indeed milder than delta that’s great news. But not necessarily great enough to avoid ‘the apocalypse’
Do we yet know if you can have omicron and delta simultaneously? I’ve seen that suggested, not yet seen it refuted. That would be truly awful
Hopefully just a horrible twist that never arrives. As we end another long, grisly year, the idea of things getting even worse is nearly unbearable
It seems like OMICROMWELL is speedily replacing the Cavalier Delta in London with great haste so I am not worried by that thought.
I think how this by-election drives things is: what happens to the polls now.
There was, separately and additional to the vaccine bounce, an immediate swimg from Lab to Con post the local elections and particularly Harlepool, when Labour looked weak and Boris strong in that period.
If Boris looks a bit more like a loser today, there could be a lot of bad polls incoming in the next 4-6 weeks.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
If Omicron is indeed milder than delta that’s great news. But not necessarily great enough to avoid ‘the apocalypse’
Do we yet know if you can have omicron and delta simultaneously? I’ve seen that suggested, not yet seen it refuted. That would be truly awful
Hopefully just a horrible twist that never arrives. As we end another long, grisly year, the idea of things getting even worse is nearly unbearable
that's alpha and beta at the same time and there's similar case reports (but not yet about omicron) but they tend to sound as if oooh this is really rare and interesting.
Russia's appetite is growing. Its MFA has published an updated draft treaty with the US and NATO on security guarantees. No NATO troops in Poland and the Baltics without Russian consent, post-Soviet countries cannot join NATO, no large-scale drills, etc....
...any troops deployed after 27.05.1997 are to be withdrawn
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
No fair enough. I wasn't implying you were, so sorry if that's how it came across. There does seem to be a tendency to not believe more positive data. I suspect many are just wary of being burned, but there is accumulating evidence that Omicron outcomes are better than previous waves.
I run (and sell) IT projects - if I concentrate on the happy path, I end up with unhappy customers and losing money.
So I'm cynical which means that on Covid I look at the happy path people and wonder what are they trying to justify.
Remember that it doesn't matter if Omicron reduces hospitalisation rates by 50% if 3 times as many people have it at the same time.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
Mind you the Liberals have been the major party in Canada since WW2 but mainly by being social democrat and social liberals and the main party of the centre left, not by being classical liberals. Macron has done the same thing to a lesser extent in France with En Marche.
In Japan and Australia the opposite applies, the Liberals have essentially become conservatives and the main party of the centre right and frequently, in Japan usually, been in government. None of those nations have PR.
However I agree the support for a party which is conservative on economics but socially liberal, pure Liberal if you like, is not much more than 10% whatever voting system used. As the LDs discovered here in 2015 when they went from being socially liberal, social democrats in 2005 and 2010 when they got over 20% to classical liberals in the coalition and falling to below 10%
That's the Conservative Party whenever it wins elections in this country.
Thatcher was not that socially liberal in office eg Section 28 and she won elections, nor is Boris in terms of ending free movement and imposing vaxports or the lockdowns he imposed or spending a lot. May certainly was not a social liberal either.
Cameron was effectively a Liberal PM in most respects but even he only won a majority in 2015 promising a referendum on the EU to stop leakage to UKIP
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
Being all things to all people is to be nothing to everyone - and to then let many down as the impressions which had been given turn out to be false if contact has to be made with political reality, as it did in 2010 and as they were very fortunate it didn't in 2019.
I think they have to build a strong base in the South East under FPTP over the medium-long term which now seems plausible. I think the Chesham and Amersham by election was more worrying for the Tories than this by election per se as this one can be written off as more of a protest vote.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
No fair enough. I wasn't implying you were, so sorry if that's how it came across. There does seem to be a tendency to not believe more positive data. I suspect many are just wary of being burned, but there is accumulating evidence that Omicron outcomes are better than previous waves.
I run (and sell) IT projects - if I concentrate on the happy path, I end up with unhappy customers and losing money.
So I'm cynical which means that on Covid I look at the happy path people and wonder what are they trying to justify.
Remember that it doesn't matter if Omicron reduces hospitalisation rates by 50% if 3 times as many people have it at the same time.
Yes it does. This myth keeps getting repeated but the problem is that how long can 3 times as many people having it be sustained?
A lot of these flawed models operate on an assumption that the population is infinite, but it isn't. This isn't some Buzz Lightyear variant going To Infinte and Beyond! If three times as many people have the virus, then it will burn out three times faster.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
That will be what they will need to do under some form of PR - with the exception of the 2019 Brexit-affected elections, the Lib Dems did really badly in the European elections held under PR for the reason that people could vote for the position they wanted, rather than protest/tactical vote against parties that they didn't want.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
Being all things to all people is to be nothing to everyone - and to then let many down as the impressions which had been given turn out to be false if contact has to be made with political reality, as it did in 2010 and as they were very fortunate it didn't in 2019.
I think they have to build a strong base in the South East under FPTP over the medium-long term which now seems plausible. I think the Chesham and Amersham by election was more worrying for the Tories than this by election per se as this one can be written off as more of a protest vote.
The second referendum party won the election - which means Brexit is dead as a political positive for Boris (note I'm not saying it's dead as a political issue, it's possible that Brexit could be viewed as a negative as time goes on).
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
I agree with that. But without some electoral headlines, they will be ignored.
They can generate headlines from policy positions. UKIP managed to do so, likewise the Greens - and that was from weaker political positions.
At the moment, even if they're not ignored, what is there for people to see with them?
Greens?
Do you have some examples?
I recall overflows into rivers, but there was no coherent analysis or thinking behind that whatsoever.
Boris should go, I want him to go and if I were a backbench Tory MP my letter would already be in.
But this by-election isn't why he'll go, if he does.
This is exactly right. The by-election changes very little. It might be a slightly revealing symptom but the problems are already well-known to Tory MPs.
Indeed, to some extent, the extent of the swing can be written off by Tories as it's not backed up in the polls, unlike the situation in autumn 1990. A 30%+ swing would usually be typical of a party in very deep trouble with public opinion, maybe a consistent 20% behind in the polls. While the LDs are no doubt delighted with the result, in some ways the greater their ability to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the Tories (both local and national in this case), the less representative the result - and the less the scale of it matters as it can't be repeated at a general election.
Also worth noting is the Lib Dems retreat into the comfort zone will be absolutely baked in after this. They will be certain that their strategy of being a dump-bucket for protest votes is the right way to go, despite it having been so obviously calamitous through the 2010s.
The electoral and political calculus might have changed a bit, though. Labour are quite likely to need the LibDems in order to form an administration. And the asking price isn't going to be just a handful of cabinet seats.
What would your strategy be ?
Find a coherent and distinctive ideological position, and develop policies from it. That will produce a much stronger brand profile and more dedicated voter support. They could try liberalism; someone should.
The number of seats in the UK with more than 10% support for liberalism is zero, there's a reason why nobody tries it.
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
Mind you the Liberals have been the major party in Canada since WW2 but mainly by being social democrat and social liberals and the main party of the centre left, not by being classical liberals. Macron has done the same thing to a lesser extent in France with En Marche.
In Japan and Australia the opposite applies, the Liberals have essentially become conservatives and the main party of the centre right and frequently, in Japan usually, been in government. None of those nations have PR.
However I agree the support for a party which is conservative on economics but socially liberal, pure Liberal if you like, is not much more than 10% whatever voting system used. As the LDs discovered here in 2015 when they went from being socially liberal, social democrats in 2005 and 2010 when they got over 20% to classical liberals in the coalition and falling to below 10%
That's the Conservative Party whenever it wins elections in this country.
Thatcher was not that socially liberal in office eg Section 28 and she won elections, nor is Boris in terms of ending free movement and imposing vaxports or the lockdowns he imposed or spending a lot. May certainly was not a social liberal either.
Cameron was effectively a Liberal PM in most respects but even he only won a majority in 2015 promising a referendum on the EU to stop leakage to UKIP
Section 28 was illiberal to the modern era but don't forget that when Thatcher entered Parliament that homosexuality was criminalised. Thatcher voted to legalise homosexuality, just as Cameron voted to legalise gay marriage which happened under his watch.
Boris is losing popularity due to vaxports and all that other crap and its noteworthy that opposition to it is coming from his own benches more than the party opposite.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
A massive shot of hopium to prepare for the festive season...
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
Given that proportionally Ventilator use is 1/5th of what it was in previous waves it would be pretty distressing if death rates were anything other than hugely reduced.
Why are you so sure about that?
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
There is reasonable reason to believe that Omicron will accelerate the time to serious disease over delta. There will still be lags, but probably shorter than previous waves.
???
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
I think it does. Infectivity is quicker because the viral replication is quicker. Note also in SA (U know, I know) hospital times are reduced on previous waves.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Have I said we are facing the apocalypse - I haven't and I don't think we are.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
No fair enough. I wasn't implying you were, so sorry if that's how it came across. There does seem to be a tendency to not believe more positive data. I suspect many are just wary of being burned, but there is accumulating evidence that Omicron outcomes are better than previous waves.
I run (and sell) IT projects - if I concentrate on the happy path, I end up with unhappy customers and losing money.
So I'm cynical which means that on Covid I look at the happy path people and wonder what are they trying to justify.
Remember that it doesn't matter if Omicron reduces hospitalisation rates by 50% if 3 times as many people have it at the same time.
Yes it does. This myth keeps getting repeated but the problem is that how long can 3 times as many people having it be sustained?
A lot of these flawed models operate on an assumption that the population is infinite, but it isn't. This isn't some Buzz Lightyear variant going To Infinte and Beyond! If three times as many people have the virus, then it will burn out three times faster.
It only requires 2 or 3 days with hospital cases to be beyond hospital capacity for there to be a big problem.
Yes once everyone has had omicron it will disappear for a while but there is a risk if hospital need seriously exceeds hospital capacity.
Comments
The people who did that in the past were Cummings and Gove. Neither of them are going to do it a second time.
Death rates in the Omicron wave ~2/3 down on previous COVID-19 waves throughout age groups. Results look solid. To what extent caused by Omicron less virulent and/or higher pop immunisation remains to be disentangled.
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20
Its amusing to see so many people crying crocodile tears over people getting pay rises. The attitude stinks of "why should my barista get a pay rise if it means I'm going to have to pay a few pence more on my Grande, Iced, Sugar-Free, Vanilla Latte With Soy Milk"
They were setup to get smashed by Delta again this winter. If they can get a quick wave of Omicron in to displace it then it might not be so terrible for them.
Getting a teeny bit nervous, though, given how much I've now got staked. It could be I'm misreading things. Perhaps it's (finally!) become too obvious to too many people, insiders and public alike, that this tawdry individual cannot do the job, should never have had the job, and should be relieved of it without the need to first have a general election. In which case, hats off, a belated call but a great call.
Those who were inspired by his manifesto of a “liberal Conservative” (his words) were most likely to back him for leader – and most likely to rebel against him on Tuesday. Not because they’re suddenly against him but because they have the courage of his (old) convictions.
it's sugar-rush politics: campaigning for the short-term high with no lasting effects for their party. In the medium term, it's Labour which is by far the biggest winner from last night.
UK gov really did take their eye off the ball.
This disease has lead times Initial Illness -> Possibly Hospitalisation -> Possibly Ventilation -> Possibly Death
Given the timescales that Omicron has been around and the previous time frames it took before Ventilation was needed we simply cannot talk accurately about Hospital and other numbers yet.
It may look like omicron results in fewer serious illnesses but I wouldn't want say that's definite yet.
Good to see Germany desperately attempting to play catch up though given how far behind they are, and the reports of them running out of vaccines, I wouldn't be making any comparisons if I was you.
Here's the latest paper the natural origins proponents are excited about:
https://twitter.com/MichaelWorobey/status/1471546513281019905
Wow. Huge development. SARS-related CoVs in bats in Europe just one mutation away from a polybasic furin cleavage at S1/S2.
And these very bat samples might contain low-frequency variants *with* functional FCS.
And the response from the Bloom Lab:
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1471573160654880769
I'm agnostic on its various hypotheses about mechanisms of origin of furin-cleavage sites, but the part of this paper that suggests furin-cleavage site might be present in two of these SARSr-CoVs as a minor variant is embarrassingly bad science that shouldn't be amplified....
...So what this study should say is: we found some bat SARS-related CoVs that are just one or a few mutations away from having a furin cleavage site, but none of them actually have a furin cleavage site even as a minor variant. (6/n)
IOW, the finding is indeed interesting, and does provide some support for the possibility of a natural origin, but the authors of the paper have over-interpreted some of their results in a way which simply isn't justified.
However, under FPTP, there's really not much point in the Lib Dems pursuing that strategy. There are a few university seats that might be tempted, but generally the support for such policies will be too geographically spread to get anywhere. They have to be all things to all people to win seats.
The proportion of patients on Oxygen is higher than in previous waves.
This very strongly suggests that patients that would have been ventilated in previous waves are "just" needing Oxygen instead.
@ElectionMapsUK
·
6h
Just for fun...
Map if the North Shropshire by-election vote share changes were repeated across the country (UNS)
LDM 505
LAB 79
SNP 37
CON 5
PLC 3
GRN 1
IND 1
Replacing Maggie with Major temporarily staunched the wound but it was ultimately temporary. The fiasco over the Black Wednesday crushed the tories for a generation, compounded as it was by the sleaze and ructions over Europe.
I believe this time it is far worse for the Conservatives. Why? Because in fact once we left the ERM in 1992 this country boomed in every other respect than Westminster sleaze. By contrast as we come into 2022, the indicators for us on almost every front are dire.
By almost replace Johnson but you won't win in 2024. The writing is now on the wall.
This fills me with great hope for 2024.
Priti Patel isn't as bad as David Cameron's Home Secretary at least.
High inflation destroys economies, and inflation is only likely to get higher as the BoE can't do much about it. I think we are heading for a very nasty time globally in economic terms, and inflation running as hot as it is should be the enormous flashing red warning light. It is not about baristas earning extra pennies, that is a very fatuous simplification of an enormous global economic problem.
Why don't those on fixed incomes apply for a new job with a better income?
And even given that I think the UK has been too slow. We need to figure out how to go far faster in case a really nasty variant occurs.
Do you want to hazard a guess at how many Conservative council candidates ran in the local elections on the flagship national, Boris-backed Conservative policy of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods?
My viewpoint is that we simply don't know yet what the end result will be - London is showing an increase in Covid Hospitalisations but that doesn't actually tell us that much.
As with everything else we won't know the truth regardless of what anyone thinks until we see London's hospital figures next week.
Put it another way, it feels like an angry wife hurling a teapot at the kitchen wall, rather than a wife calmly sitting down signing divorce papers.
The Tories can still win in 2024, not least because it is STILL very hard to see a route to a Labour majority, and voters will flinch at a shambolic, chaotic Lab-LD-Nat Coalition
But, can the Tories win under Boris? Doubtful
But they aren't. The data is laggy but not non-existent. I've looked at the previous several months of data and built a reporting lag model to estimate what today's figures will look like. By comparing with previous SA waves we reduce the uncertainty.
Covid is uncertain but it isn't unknowable.
I've been repeatedly accused of being a doom saying pessimist on this site (for the crime of pointing out other people's over optimistic predictions had been busted by reality) so I am now in the unique position of being accused of being too optimistic.
Omicron results in earlier sickness because it seemingly attacks the throat first rather than the lungs. While that covers the initial illness it doesn't tell us anything about what happens if the body doesn't fight the illness and the illness progresses.
Of course, right now it's a good thing that Germany is speeding along, they've got the message loud and clear, where as the US seems to still be on the 6 month wait prior to having a booster (although given they vaccinated quickly in the spring at a 3 week gap I imagine most have now reached the 6 months).
In this country we're older but vastly better vaccinated - if they're not getting near their previous peaks, there is not yet a credible reason to believe we will get near ours.
People have been banging on for ages, even before the pandemic, about the strategic risk of relying so heavily on China, and you would have hoped that the early stages of the pandemic would have driven the lesson home to everyone else. Next year I fear that we will rue not taking steps earlier to reduce our economic reliance on imports from China.
So 28% needing intervention has gone dow to 16.5% needing intervention.
So, a great deal of patients who would have needed Oxygen last time out don't need it at all this time.
After any initial wage increase, wages increases usually lag inflation so it's often the case people start to feel worse off and never quite catch up.
Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure we are not facing the apocalypse.
Only by using dodgy data that excluded costs from the data has inflation not been here for decades.
A return to some wage inflation would be a good thing for workers. It might be a bad thing for home owners on pensions, but they've had it all their own way for decades now.
Blair was working with LDs in 1997, then threw them under the bus when he no longer needed them.
We all know about 2015.
I wonder how they would play it next time?
Even in countries with PR where the voters don't hate freedom it usually tops out around 15% nationally, in the UK under FPTP it's an entirely hopeless proposition. You'd do better with a single-issue party dedicated to bird-watching.
If not, when would be the optimum time to replace him?
CON - 59%
LAB - 8%
REF - 7%
LDs - 1%
So just 1% switching to the LDs.
NS goes back to the Cons at the general but what it does show is if Lab and LD voters are smart the Cons can be removed from office quite easily. The notion that Brexit has created for them a new 'values driven' base which is solid enough to make them hot favourites looks false to me now. Good news if true.
What I'm not doing, however, as other people are, is use random data from elsewhere to paint a story that may not be accurate. I'm merely reporting on things I can provide valid links and science behind while others are posting theories that may or may not end up being true.
At the moment, even if they're not ignored, what is there for people to see with them?
Liberalism isn't unpopular.
A liberal Lib Dem party can still be a repository for protest votes, even while carrying the flag for Liberalism. The problem is that just being the former means you serve no purpose and the protestors just move on as they did in 2015 abandoning the Lib Dems to go to UKIP instead.
There does seem to be a tendency to not believe more positive data. I suspect many are just wary of being burned, but there is accumulating evidence that Omicron outcomes are better than previous waves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-MMpiwoqvo&t=121s
We simply don't have the data for that at all and some predicting a sharp down slope is based on hope rather than data.
If Omicron is indeed milder than delta that’s great news. But not necessarily great enough to avoid ‘the apocalypse’
Do we yet know if you can have omicron and delta simultaneously? I’ve seen that suggested, not yet seen it refuted. That would be truly awful
Hopefully just a horrible twist that never arrives. As we end another long, grisly year, the idea of things getting even worse is nearly unbearable
I'm calling for Boris to resign and I'm a Tory, for heaven's sake.
In Japan and Australia the opposite applies, the Liberals have essentially become conservatives and the main party of the centre right and frequently, in Japan usually, been in government. None of those nations have PR.
However I agree the support for a party which is conservative on economics but socially liberal, pure Liberal if you like, is not much more than 10% whatever voting system used. As the LDs discovered here in 2015 when they went from being socially liberal, social democrats in 2005 and 2010 when they got over 20% to classical liberals in the coalition and falling to below 10%
Remember that often feeling shit is down to your bodies reaction not the virus, so I see little reason why two strains would make that worse. We encounter lots of stuff everyday.
There was, separately and additional to the vaccine bounce, an immediate swimg from Lab to Con post the local elections and particularly Harlepool, when Labour looked weak and Boris strong in that period.
If Boris looks a bit more like a loser today, there could be a lot of bad polls incoming in the next 4-6 weeks.
that's alpha and beta at the same time and there's similar case reports (but not yet about omicron) but they tend to sound as if oooh this is really rare and interesting.
...any troops deployed after 27.05.1997 are to be withdrawn
https://twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1471803726910439429?s=20
So I'm cynical which means that on Covid I look at the happy path people and wonder what are they trying to justify.
Remember that it doesn't matter if Omicron reduces hospitalisation rates by 50% if 3 times as many people have it at the same time.
Cameron was effectively a Liberal PM in most respects but even he only won a majority in 2015 promising a referendum on the EU to stop leakage to UKIP
A lot of these flawed models operate on an assumption that the population is infinite, but it isn't. This isn't some Buzz Lightyear variant going To Infinte and Beyond! If three times as many people have the virus, then it will burn out three times faster.
Do you have some examples?
I recall overflows into rivers, but there was no coherent analysis or thinking behind that whatsoever.
Boris is losing popularity due to vaxports and all that other crap and its noteworthy that opposition to it is coming from his own benches more than the party opposite.
May never won a majority.
Yes once everyone has had omicron it will disappear for a while but there is a risk if hospital need seriously exceeds hospital capacity.