My biggest fear after this morning's result is that the Conservatives decide, now Brexit is exhausted as an issue, that the "war on woke" will be their wedge issue from now 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.
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.
May never won a majority.
You do realise Thatcher throwing her principles under a bus to fuel homophobia and win personal power is worse right?
Section 28 was introduce in 1988. It is not some ancient piece of legislation from the 50's when she entered parliament.
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.
May never won a majority.
Section 28 and the broadcasting ban were the reasons I vowed never to vote Conservative in my life. The idea of a “liberal Tory” is an anathema to Gen X’ers. Millennials are too young to remember and Boomers don’t care.
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.
Then some people die in those few days. How many are we talking about do you think? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions?
How does that compare to the damage the rest of the pandemic and the restrictions are doing?
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 good point, there. If Starmer asked Johnson politely to resign this morning, I'm sure he'd find it very hard to refuse, so the fact that he probably won't is very telling.
My biggest fear after this morning's result is that the Conservatives decide, now Brexit is exhausted as an issue, that the "war on woke" will be their wedge issue from now on.
I hope they do - I find the "war on woke" entertainment as they focus of utterly trivial things 99% of the public don't care about.
My biggest fear after this morning's result is that the Conservatives decide, now Brexit is exhausted as an issue, that the "war on woke" will be their wedge issue from now on.
I hope they do - I find the "war on woke" entertainment as they focus of utterly trivial things 99% of the public don't care about.
Yes.
If the Tories focus on woke they will not regain my vote and would deserve heading into Opposition.
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.
I'm not sure the entire electorate will blame the Tories for the chaos around Covid. My staunchly lib dems wife who hates Boris has frequently given the government the benefit of the doubt on good and bad covid issues including procurement, and she is intelligent enough to realise that shortages and inflation that are affecting other western economies can't be wholly attributed to Brexit. She is even fairly sanguine about the so called parties, inasmuch as we all got stuck doing quizzes on zoom. She is very concerned though about sleaze, and the fraud related to the flat renovation.
And for me that is in no way symptomatic of chaos - it is a simple and deliberate attempt to deceive the British public, and to undermine the processes that hold MPs to account for their behaviour.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
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.
Well, if you can have both at the same time then that would mean Omicron the Fucker of Christmas would not replace Delta, as has been thought, merely add to it; and replacing Delta would possibly be a good thing for some countries
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.
May never won a majority.
You do realise Thatcher throwing her principles under a bus to fuel homophobia and win personal power is worse right?
Section 28 was introduce in 1988. It is not some ancient piece of legislation from the 50's when she entered parliament.
Sorry I'm one of those Millennials that DougSeal referred to.
I was six. It's ancient to me.
Though she never won an election again after 1988 and was evicted from office later that term so I'm not sure that counteracts my thesis that liberal Conservativism is election winning.
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 key thing about analysing Omicron is that you need more data.
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
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 key thing about analysing Omicron is that you need more data.
Unfortunately, by the time you have that data, it's too late to use it to decide to do anything differently, because Omicron spreads so damn quickly.
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 key thing about analysing Omicron is that you need more data.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Some unsolicited advice for the Lib Dem leadership from a long-standing member following this election:
- Don't get too cocky vis a vis the Tories: this was a protest vote, not a mandate for Lib Dem policies or rejoining the EU. - Don't get cocky vis a vis Labour or start fantasising about replacing them as the centre left party. This was a tactical vote. LDs and Starmer need each other. Now is the time to increase the informal contacts and really strategise about how to make the anti-Tory vote more efficient - Make use of the result and the press coverage to start rebuilding support in the lost areas of the Marches and West Country. The party has a strong message for rural and farming communities, and this is an opportunity to showcase one of the things the Lib Dems have a good track record on: local representation and visibility - Start to ramp up the Lib Dem blitz in the home counties blue wall. Now is the time: focus on the next local elections, make noise and waves where there is already council representation, go big on local issues - When the next election comes, be sensible with targeting. Don't get carried away by decapitation strategies or trying to keep North Shropshire (it will go back blue come what may). - Keep Ed Davey in place. The fact he gets little air time and can seem a bit dull need not be a big problem. He exudes competence, is an effective operator and doesn't put some people off like Jo Swinson did
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?
Indeed. People shouldn't kid themselves. Just as Johnson used Brexit as a vehicle to gain power, the Tory Party and Leavers used him as a vehicle for what they wanted, a Con election win and the UK taken out of the EU. To the extent there was ideology in the mix it was the ideology of nationalist populism. He was (is) Mr Brexit - such was his USP- and Brexit was (is) a nationalist populist project. It made rational sense to support him to deliver that project and to smash Corbyn. Anybody who supported him for other reasons - eg and esp thinking he was some sort of 'liberal one nation' Conservative - needs to take a look in the mirror because it's not only obvious now they were being conned it was obvious then.
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
John Healey, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, asked:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the cost has been of maintaining the seven month deployment of the Carrier Strike Group to the Indo-Pacific to date.”
James Heappey, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, responded:
“The additional operating cost of deploying the Carrier Strike Group is currently estimated at £73 million, this covers any costs incurred above what those personnel and capabilities deployed would usually cost to defence, for example fuel costs, operational allowances, and other incidental costs. Further work is ongoing to refine those cost estimates and provide a final figure.”
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
I’ve also read that, Yes, it strikes the upper airways rather than the lungs, making it ‘less virulent’ but so many more people will get it - ‘70 times faster spread’ - enough WILL get seriously sick, in the lungs = big problemo
‘Omicron spread about 70 times quicker than Delta in human bronchial samples, a lab study found’
Stephen Bush @stephenkb · 7h Some brief thoughts on that: will spread fear in the Conservative Party, weaken Boris Johnson's position as leader, and, as a result, probably makes another lockdown less likely:
And by 'less likely' I really do just think 'no, I just don't see how England locks down again in this parliament':
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.
Surely the other way around . If the Lib dems cannot win a seat close to London with all the available volunteers available and a classic NIMBY issue of Hs2 when will they win. North Shropshire is hardly fertile ground. The Tories have managed to lose 25000 votes and the Lib dems gained 12000. The problem for the Tories is if voters stay home.
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
Just a count in the big whatsapp groups of mates, exactly half (14 out of 28) have got big Omi all of us in/around London. For my uni mates it's only three out of twelve but that's primarily not in London.
It really does seem as though that big Omi is going to be very, very fast in doing whatever it does. The UK's under 40s will all have had it by the end of next week if my experience is representative!
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.
May never won a majority.
You do realise Thatcher throwing her principles under a bus to fuel homophobia and win personal power is worse right?
Section 28 was introduce in 1988. It is not some ancient piece of legislation from the 50's when she entered parliament.
Sorry I'm one of those Millennials that DougSeal referred to.
I was six. It's ancient to me.
Though she never won an election again after 1988 and was evicted from office later that term so I'm not sure that counteracts my thesis that liberal Conservativism is election winning.
Boris won in 2019 on a platform that included ending free movement, Cameron did not win outright in 2010 despite a liberal platform. The fact is the Conservative Party needs social conservatives to win as much as it needs economic liberals
Some unsolicited advice for the Lib Dem leadership from a long-standing member following this election:
- Don't get too cocky vis a vis the Tories: this was a protest vote, not a mandate for Lib Dem policies or rejoining the EU. - Don't get cocky vis a vis Labour or start fantasising about replacing them as the centre left party. This was a tactical vote. LDs and Starmer need each other. Now is the time to increase the informal contacts and really strategise about how to make the anti-Tory vote more efficient - Make use of the result and the press coverage to start rebuilding support in the lost areas of the Marches and West Country. The party has a strong message for rural and farming communities, and this is an opportunity to showcase one of the things the Lib Dems have a good track record on: local representation and visibility - Start to ramp up the Lib Dem blitz in the home counties blue wall. Now is the time: focus on the next local elections, make noise and waves where there is already council representation, go big on local issues - When the next election comes, be sensible with targeting. Don't get carried away by decapitation strategies or trying to keep North Shropshire (it will go back blue come what may). - Keep Ed Davey in place. The fact he gets little air time and can seem a bit dull need not be a big problem. He exudes competence, is an effective operator and doesn't put some people off like Jo Swinson did
Agree with all this. It would be interesting though to see the LD’s Top 50 targets. I doubt many are in the Marches?
One of the policy dilemmas for the LDs is that their targets are largely in seats in the SE, dominated by home-owning pensioners.
How do the LDs appeal to them without continuing the obscene featherbedding that hurts the productive part of the economy?
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
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?
Indeed. People shouldn't kid themselves. Just as Johnson used Brexit as a vehicle to gain power, the Tory Party and Leavers used him as a vehicle for what they wanted, a Con election win and the UK taken out of the EU. To the extent there was ideology in the mix it was the ideology of nationalist populism. He was (is) Mr Brexit - such was his USP- and Brexit was (is) a nationalist populist project. It made rational sense to support him to deliver that project and to smash Corbyn. Anybody who supported him for other reasons - eg and esp thinking he was some sort of 'liberal one nation' Conservative - needs to take a look in the mirror because it's not only obvious now they were being conned it was obvious then.
Three weeks ago now I suggested Omicron was “milder”. Not harmless of course, but milder.
I’ve been waiting for data to refute it, but so far I am still waiting.
Is it too early to suggest that Boris’s Plan B was the mother of all over-reactions and that he’s needlessly sent thousands of small hospitality businesses to the wall?
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
Yes, for all the shit it gets AZ still does okay against big Omi. J&J really looks marginal at this point and the Chinese and Russian efforts look like shite on a stick that they're selling as Magnums.
Just a count in the big whatsapp groups of mates, exactly half (14 out of 28) have got big Omi all of us in/around London. For my uni mates it's only three out of twelve but that's primarily not in London.
It really does seem as though that big Omi is going to be very, very fast in doing whatever it does. The UK's under 40s will all have had it by the end of next week if my experience is representative!
Woke this morning, I am now seeing the same within my groups. Seems everybody points to parties they have been to and saying well really high numbers from that have now got it. Now that might be cognitive bias, but definitely large numbers have it.
Just a count in the big whatsapp groups of mates, exactly half (14 out of 28) have got big Omi all of us in/around London. For my uni mates it's only three out of twelve but that's primarily not in London.
It really does seem as though that big Omi is going to be very, very fast in doing whatever it does. The UK's under 40s will all have had it by the end of next week if my experience is representative!
From all the anecdotal reporting it seems to be spreading fastest amongst young adults.
Given schools are open, considering reported virulence, you'd think there'd be major reports of entire school classes or year groups coming down with it, but I've not heard much reporting of Omicron in schools at all. Does this match what you've seen or not?
It does seem a serious oddity that schools aren't all getting flooded with Omicron considering how contagious its supposed to be, why don't all children have it already?
The only thing I can think of is that Delta had already gone through schools before Omicron hit. Or do you think there's another explanation?
Three weeks ago now I suggested Omicron was “milder”. Not harmless of course, but milder.
I’ve been waiting for data to refute it, but so far I am still waiting.
Is it too early to suggest that Boris’s Plan B was the mother of all over-reactions and that he’s needlessly sent thousands of small hospitality businesses to the wall?
Russia will be along in a moment and claiming its all Fake News about Sputnik and it is actually 89% effect against Omicron.....you can't see our working, but take our word for it.
More seriously, this doesn't help the fight against the anti-vaxxer bullshit, as they will now spread all the crap about look look all these "state injectables" don't work.
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
However if you stick an mRNA on top of any of those then you get to very good levels of protection.
Yes, but firstly you need such vaccines in vast quantities, and secondly you are going to need a time machine if you want to protect a lot of people before Omicron gets to them first.
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
The pips are finally squeaking, though some delusion still stubbornly clings on (“I’d like to think…”)
Interestingly, have confirmation why the headline hospital numbers are higher than what the NHS statistics website claims (even in the file where they further split out incidental covid).
Main stats website is still using admission within 28 days of positive test, whereas NHS now using admission with 14 days. Difference is about 10% of the total, so further increases the share of hospital beds in the covid numbers which would be occupied even without covid.
Especially worth bearing in mind for next few weeks as number of cases goes through the roof. Incidentally admissions should go up linearly with that trend so current 2-2.5k likely to rise to more like 4k in next few weeks.
Some unsolicited advice for the Lib Dem leadership from a long-standing member following this election:
.....
- Keep Ed Davey in place. The fact he gets little air time and can seem a bit dull need not be a big problem. He exudes competence, is an effective operator and doesn't put some people off like Jo Swinson did
He exudes confidence ..... really?
I'd say any of his predecessors were more attractive. Certainly, Ashdown & Kennedy, even Swinson.
Clegg was a slimy thing that did crawl with legs across the slimy sea ... but he still had a slithery charm.
Ed Davey is almost a caricature of a smug, self-satisfied, prosperous white liberal with a public school education and PPE degree at Oxford.
In fact, I'd say his corpulent and puffing figure symbolizes the LibDem's profound lack of self-awareness, smugness and lecturing self-righteousness.
Any news on whether he has given up his consultancy yet?
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
I believe it was actually Henry IV who said that to Falstaff, not Henry V
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
Yes, for all the shit it gets AZ still does okay against big Omi. J&J really looks marginal at this point and the Chinese and Russian efforts look like shite on a stick that they're selling as Magnums.
My guess is that J&J is actually fine, but should always have been delivered as two doses, given that it is very similar to AZ.
Interestingly, have confirmation why the headline hospital numbers are higher than what the NHS statistics website claims (even in the file where they further split out incidental covid).
Main stats website is still using admission within 28 days of positive test, whereas NHS now using admission with 14 days. Difference is about 10% of the total, so further increases the share of hospital beds in the covid numbers which would be occupied even without covid.
Especially worth bearing in mind for next few weeks as number of cases goes through the roof. Incidentally admissions should go up linearly with that trend so current 2-2.5k likely to rise to more like 4k in next few weeks.
The more people get double vaccinated and get their boosters, the less the link between cases rising and hospital admissions rising will be
Latest ONS survey out. Exactly as expected, covers to 11th December, but sample time range covers a fair bit before that, and so it shows absolutely nothing yet.
Three weeks ago now I suggested Omicron was “milder”. Not harmless of course, but milder.
I’ve been waiting for data to refute it, but so far I am still waiting.
Is it too early to suggest that Boris’s Plan B was the mother of all over-reactions and that he’s needlessly sent thousands of small hospitality businesses to the wall?
Perhaps, but the harsh reality is that people are now increasingly cancelling because of infections not advice. The government needs to reinstate support asap.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Interestingly, have confirmation why the headline hospital numbers are higher than what the NHS statistics website claims (even in the file where they further split out incidental covid).
Main stats website is still using admission within 28 days of positive test, whereas NHS now using admission with 14 days. Difference is about 10% of the total, so further increases the share of hospital beds in the covid numbers which would be occupied even without covid.
Especially worth bearing in mind for next few weeks as number of cases goes through the roof. Incidentally admissions should go up linearly with that trend so current 2-2.5k likely to rise to more like 4k in next few weeks.
The more people get double vaccinated and get their boosters, the less the link between cases rising and hospital admissions rising will be
The point being, as cases rise, the number of positive cases in hospital for broken legs or cancer is going to increase no matter how good the vaccine is.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities. Remember you would need to be producing / buying massive qualities of certain specialist chemicals and equipment, which would be another red flag.
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.
I'm not sure the entire electorate will blame the Tories for the chaos around Covid. My staunchly lib dems wife who hates Boris has frequently given the government the benefit of the doubt on good and bad covid issues including procurement, and she is intelligent enough to realise that shortages and inflation that are affecting other western economies can't be wholly attributed to Brexit. She is even fairly sanguine about the so called parties, inasmuch as we all got stuck doing quizzes on zoom. She is very concerned though about sleaze, and the fraud related to the flat renovation.
And for me that is in no way symptomatic of chaos - it is a simple and deliberate attempt to deceive the British public, and to undermine the processes that hold MPs to account for their behaviour.
With both Lord Geidt and the Electoral Commission sniffing round Boris's wallpaper, as well as Kathryn Stone, the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, whose botched defenestration by Boris led directly to yesterday's by-election, corruption might yet be what brings Boris down.
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).
Yep, this for me is the big takeout for GE purposes. The platform for the 2019 win was Johnson getting almost all the Leave vote and many of them voted as Leavers not as Tories. It looks unlikely that he - or the Cons under anybody else - will be able to pull that off again. Con majority out to 2.8 and I wouldn't argue too much with that. Why would a floating voter go Tory next time with no Brexit, no Corbyn, no clear offer or ideology, and the country in a mess?
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities.
I now join the AZ/AZ/Moderna club. is this an exclusive club or are there lots already in it?
I have to say it was very efficient, much more so than the first 2. We arrived 20 minuets early, but they where happy for us to come in, there was one person in the queue ahead of us, we whet all the way though and out in 16 minuets, meaning we left 4 minuets before we where meant to arrive.
The onw person in the queue ahead of us was a lady I think in her late 20s, and asked, 'this is my first jab, do I need to book or can I just walk in?' and it seems you don't need to book if its your first jab, so she was able to just walk in. Makes me feel very happy to see people getting there first jab.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities.
I suppose the other possibility is that if Omicron is milder then the Chinese might end up giving Pfizer to the leadership and then let Omicron spread amongst the plebs.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
If a variant had occurred before Omicron with the same infectiousness but three times the fatality rate, it would have been equally widespread before we had time to work it out. It's highly unlikely that the evolutionary process you postulate exists in this case. The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
Some unsolicited advice for the Lib Dem leadership from a long-standing member following this election:
.....
- Keep Ed Davey in place. The fact he gets little air time and can seem a bit dull need not be a big problem. He exudes competence, is an effective operator and doesn't put some people off like Jo Swinson did
He exudes confidence ..... really?
I'd say any of his predecessors were more attractive. Certainly, Ashdown & Kennedy, even Swinson.
Clegg was a slimy thing that did crawl with legs across the slimy sea ... but he still had a slithery charm.
Ed Davey is almost a caricature of a smug, self-satisfied, prosperous white liberal with a public school education and PPE degree at Oxford.
In fact, I'd say his corpulent and puffing figure symbolizes the LibDem's profound lack of self-awareness, smugness and lecturing self-righteousness.
Any news on whether he has given up his consultancy yet?
I now join the AZ/AZ/Moderna club. is this an exclusive club or are there lots already in it?
I have to say it was very efficient, much more so than the first 2. We arrived 20 minuets early, but they where happy for us to come in, there was one person in the queue ahead of us, we whet all the way though and out in 16 minuets, meaning we left 4 minuets before we where meant to arrive.
The onw person in the queue ahead of us was a lady I think in her late 20s, and asked, 'this is my first jab, do I need to book or can I just walk in?' and it seems you don't need to book if its your first jab, so she was able to just walk in. Makes me feel very happy to see people getting there first jab.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities.
The Chinese are pretty good at nicking IP though
Oh I can definitely believe they have nicked the IP of all these vaccines. But turning that into 2bn doses and nobody noticing, that is a different kettle of fish.
Its like the drug cartels, you have to get vast quantities of certain chemicals from somewhere. Even though they get their hands on them via corruption, people can estimate the amount of for instance of coke being made, because it requires some specific chemicals and you can get an estimate based on worldwide production.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
If a variant had occurred before Omicron with the same infectiousness but three times the fatality rate, it would have been equally widespread before we had time to work it out. It's highly unlikely that the evolutionary process you postulate exists in this case. The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
In the short-term mutations will be pretty well random.
In the longer-term (and humans are pretty good at accelerating the longer term) evolution will aid the milder ones though.
Milder mutations will be more likely to be allowed to spread.
The "Omicron is mild" attitude is very widespread already today, which is no doubt affecting how people are acting. If "Omicron is a death sentence" were the attitude people would be reacting differently to it.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
If a variant had occurred before Omicron with the same infectiousness but three times the fatality rate, it would have been equally widespread before we had time to work it out. It's highly unlikely that the evolutionary process you postulate exists in this case. The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
It's random if the death happens slowly enough to not inhibit onward spread (as is the case here). There's very strong evolutionary pressure against mutations which result in rapid death.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
If a variant had occurred before Omicron with the same infectiousness but three times the fatality rate, it would have been equally widespread before we had time to work it out. It's highly unlikely that the evolutionary process you postulate exists in this case. The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
Because evolution and viruses are not able to project into the future and imagine how their hosts will respond. The argument "if x then y, y is bad for reproduction, therefore not x" is definitely NOT how evolution works.
Just woken up. What a by-election!! 3 instant thoughts. 1 Refuk are finished. Controversy on Plan B and tens of thousands of Tory voters deserting in a massive Leave seat, and they are fifth behind the Greens. 2 Support for Boris was an ocean wide a puddle deep. 3 What the holy hell was the nonsense from MSM at poll closing time? They had the Tories winning cos of Labour votes before a vote was even counted. You get better analysis on here from amateurs than the nonsense peddled by the paid bollockers on.
It hasn't been much noticed in the UK, but Ireland is in some turmoil because NPHET (their healthcare advisory body for the pandemic) has recommended that all pubs and restaurants should be obliged to close at 5pm. Unsurprisingly, there's rather a lot of resistance to this.
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
I read the suggestion that the number of Omicron mutations resulted from co-infection and RNA transfer between the parent COVID strain (is it beta or Delta ethnicity? - don't recall) and the 229E endemic sniffle strain.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
Sure, this flavour is in fact milder, which is good, but I don't see a trade off. It *in fact* tends to replicate in the upper airways and leave the lungs alone but there is no particular reason that was more likely to happen than it getting more virulent everywhere.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
If a variant had occurred before Omicron with the same infectiousness but three times the fatality rate, it would have been equally widespread before we had time to work it out. It's highly unlikely that the evolutionary process you postulate exists in this case. The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
Because evolution and viruses are not able to project into the future and imagine how their hosts will respond. The argument "if x then y, y is bad for reproduction, therefore not x" is definitely NOT how evolution works.
Evolution may not project into the future but it does affect the future.
If this virus were more deadly instead of milder, people would be acting differently to it. The fact its milder means that more people are less bothered about it spreading, so its allowed to spread more.
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
I believe it was actually Henry IV who said that to Falstaff, not Henry V
The more apposite quote is this. Falstaff: Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world. Prince Henry: I do, I will.
With Boris as Falstaff, and Hal as everyone else.
And this, from Boris himself: “I totally understand people’s frustrations, I hear what the voters are saying. In all humility, I’ve got to accept that verdict”.
Interestingly, have confirmation why the headline hospital numbers are higher than what the NHS statistics website claims (even in the file where they further split out incidental covid).
Main stats website is still using admission within 28 days of positive test, whereas NHS now using admission with 14 days. Difference is about 10% of the total, so further increases the share of hospital beds in the covid numbers which would be occupied even without covid.
Especially worth bearing in mind for next few weeks as number of cases goes through the roof. Incidentally admissions should go up linearly with that trend so current 2-2.5k likely to rise to more like 4k in next few weeks.
The more people get double vaccinated and get their boosters, the less the link between cases rising and hospital admissions rising will be
The point being, as cases rise, the number of positive cases in hospital for broken legs or cancer is going to increase no matter how good the vaccine is.
Yes absolutely, at one point is SA, 76% of the Omicron cases in their hospitals had come in for an unrelated reason, and been diagnosed for COVID only because of they test all patients. Yhis is going to be hard to track, keeping an eye on the number in ventilation/ICU rather than the 'covid admissions' may be a better indication, however, this is even more of a lagging indicator, perhaps look at total admishtions?
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
I believe it was actually Henry IV who said that to Falstaff, not Henry V
Lancet editor who published letter slamming Covid lab leak theory as 'conspiracy' admits he knew about lead author's links to Chinese lab at centre of cover-up for a YEAR before acknowledging conflict of interests
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
Yes, for all the shit it gets AZ still does okay against big Omi. J&J really looks marginal at this point and the Chinese and Russian efforts look like shite on a stick that they're selling as Magnums.
My guess is that J&J is actually fine, but should always have been delivered as two doses, given that it is very similar to AZ.
Indeed, around 20m people in Europe have got J&J as their only vaccine and are only eligible for one booster dose, I really hope the EMA changes the guidance and makes them eligible for two doses of Pfizer/Moderna.
I got an answer to your question from yesterday btw, I'm going to paraphrase because his answer was really technical and full of scientific and statistical jargon (bloody scientists!).
For the immunity groups of three doses of vaccine or higher - immunity is expected to be in the very high 90s in terms of reducing severe disease. This also includes people with an Alpha or Delta infection within the last 12 months. If 1000 people with three doses or previous infection were exposed to Omicron his model suggests 2 or 3 would present severe symptoms.
For two doses - by the same measure it's expected to be in the low 60s or high 50s. If a 1000 two dose people got exposed to Omicron he expects ~20 would get severe symptoms.
For single dose - no significant reduction, AZ recipients may have marginally reduced severity.
For the "super immune" which he classes as people with at least one dose of AZ/Pfizer and an infection within the last twelve months Omicron presents little to no danger, fewer than 1/1000 people will develop severe symptoms.
I've asked him for rough estimates of how the UK population breaks down into the categories so hopefully we'll get an update on that.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities.
I suppose the other possibility is that if Omicron is milder then the Chinese might end up giving Pfizer to the leadership and then let Omicron spread amongst the plebs.
Er. No.
One thing about autocracies is that popular support is often a mile wide and an inch deep.
Many people don't realise what one of the catalysts for the final attack on the Tiananmen Square Square protest was. The students were being non-violent. But some of the locals were joining in and.... dealing with police and other minor functionaries of the Party in the way that happens at the end of regimes.
If they lose the acquiesce of the populace, Xi and the rest know they will be *lucky* if they get a short drop and a sudden stop.
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.
May never won a majority.
His is not sinking with the public because of Covid restrictions. That's you projecting your reasons onto others. He's losing the public due to them wising up about what sort of person he is and what sort of show he's running - the shambles, the hypocrisy, the corruption, the lack of seriousness and grip. The Peppa Pig nonsense cut through. As did the illegal parties. And the sleazy attempt to save Paterson and degrade the process for maintaining parliamentary standards. That's the 'crap' that's hitting the fan, and not before time. I'm heartened by it. I was of the firm opinion he'd keep getting away with murder, due to the power of his brand, I'm less sure of that now.
I now join the AZ/AZ/Moderna club. is this an exclusive club or are there lots already in it?
I have to say it was very efficient, much more so than the first 2. We arrived 20 minuets early, but they where happy for us to come in, there was one person in the queue ahead of us, we whet all the way though and out in 16 minuets, meaning we left 4 minuets before we where meant to arrive.
The onw person in the queue ahead of us was a lady I think in her late 20s, and asked, 'this is my first jab, do I need to book or can I just walk in?' and it seems you don't need to book if its your first jab, so she was able to just walk in. Makes me feel very happy to see people getting there first jab.
No side effects felt so far
Mrs C and I also in the A/A/M club.
Mrs Seal has been in that club too, since June in fact, when she decided to preempt the NHS booster rollout by getting an extra shot on her trip to see her parents in Connecticut. She’s swimming in vaccines
What yesterday shows is that a large proportion of natural Conservatives think Boris needs at least a kick up the arse. A free shot. The Bishop Brennan By-election.
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
I believe it was actually Henry IV who said that to Falstaff, not Henry V
No, you are wrong.
He's right. Henry IV is Hal's dad, the Bolingbroke of Richard II.
I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
Nah, both of them are crap. Chile gave up at 3 doses and moved onto Pfizer as it still had low efficacy.
While China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
Do we know if China actually used their own vaccines or did they use Pfizer or similar?
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Well the leadership might have got Pfizer, but no way they would have managed to buy who over 2bn doses of Pfizer without anybody noticing....so it seems likely they used their 2 own homegrown ones, one of which is has always been utter crap, the other was claimed to be at least a bit effective against original variant.
Unless they managed to steal the formula and manufactured it themselves.
I suppose it is a possibility. Seems unlikely that you could keep that quiet though, given the shear scale of the operation you require to produce such large quantities.
The Chinese are pretty good at nicking IP though
Oh I can definitely believe they have nicked the IP of all these vaccines. But turning that into 2bn doses and nobody noticing, that is a different kettle of fish.
Its like the drug cartels, you have to get vast quantities of certain chemicals from somewhere. Even though they get their hands on them via corruption, people can estimate the amount of for instance of coke being made, because it requires some specific chemicals and you can get an estimate based on worldwide production.
Nearly all the illegally produced drugs require extremely simple chemistry - bath tub level.
mRNA vaccines require a vast stack of specialist equipment, operated by experts. And there is a whole bunch of domain knowledge that isn't in the "formula".
Comments
Conservative: 29% (-3)
Labour: 27% (–)
Don't know: 24% (-1)
Narrowest ever lead for Conservatives in this category.
Changes +/- 6 Dec
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1471804905635598339?s=20
Section 28 was introduce in 1988. It is not some ancient piece of legislation from the 50's when she entered parliament.
How does that compare to the damage the rest of the pandemic and the restrictions are doing?
If the Tories focus on woke they will not regain my vote and would deserve heading into Opposition.
And for me that is in no way symptomatic of chaos - it is a simple and deliberate attempt to deceive the British public, and to undermine the processes that hold MPs to account for their behaviour.
And that this has allowed Omicron to thrive in the upper lungs where it can replicate and from which it can reinfect quicker, but also makes it milder.
We've had, all through the pandemic saying there's no reason to presume an infection would get milder naturally, unless it confers an advantage. Here is the advantage, an evolutionary reason for mildness beyond your host being able to walk around.
Ignoring the real day to day for a moment, researchers are going to have so much material with which to look at prior pandemics here - they will see anew in the curves they have when and where new variants arise, when the milder strains arise. The advancement in understanding is going to be phenomenal.
At least we will know very very soon
They are the political equivalent of an appendix, an evolutionary hold-over with no obvious biological function.
When there is a dull pain in the body politic, the appendix becomes inflamed and full of pus.
Sure, we then get appendicitis, or stunning LibDem by-elections victories.
But, the final result is that either the inflammation dies away, or there is an appendectomy.
And the LibDems return to being a narrow and forgotten pouch that projects out from the colon. Or discarded in the surgical bin for human waste.
I was six. It's ancient to me.
Though she never won an election again after 1988 and was evicted from office later that term so I'm not sure that counteracts my thesis that liberal Conservativism is election winning.
BREAKING: Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson and the Sputnik Covid-19 vaccines produce little or no antibodies against omicron, a new study finds trib.al/vwS7HmH
https://twitter.com/bloomberguk/status/1471809942986366982?s=21
Going by what we know so far, places like Germany or the US are in for a world of trouble in the coming weeks.
So I want to make a few general points here once that go beyond the science (will do the rest later):
https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1471780394504802313?s=20
However the Lib Dems might, like one of S J Gould’s ‘spandrels’, find an unexpected new use: as the party of Rejoin EEA/EU
There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
- Don't get too cocky vis a vis the Tories: this was a protest vote, not a mandate for Lib Dem policies or rejoining the EU.
- Don't get cocky vis a vis Labour or start fantasising about replacing them as the centre left party. This was a tactical vote. LDs and Starmer need each other. Now is the time to increase the informal contacts and really strategise about how to make the anti-Tory vote more efficient
- Make use of the result and the press coverage to start rebuilding support in the lost areas of the Marches and West Country. The party has a strong message for rural and farming communities, and this is an opportunity to showcase one of the things the Lib Dems have a good track record on: local representation and visibility
- Start to ramp up the Lib Dem blitz in the home counties blue wall. Now is the time: focus on the next local elections, make noise and waves where there is already council representation, go big on local issues
- When the next election comes, be sensible with targeting. Don't get carried away by decapitation strategies or trying to keep North Shropshire (it will go back blue come what may).
- Keep Ed Davey in place. The fact he gets little air time and can seem a bit dull need not be a big problem. He exudes competence, is an effective operator and doesn't put some people off like Jo Swinson did
It's not as if the Government is going to fall today, is it?
As I told my MP the other night, my own take is that Boris has failed to grow into the role of being PM. He has remained the Prince Hal of Henry IV Part 1 - happy to faff around with Falstaff and Pistol and Doll Tearsheet. He has not become the steely King Henry V, distancing himself with "I know thee not, old man...." of Part 2.
I'd like to think that without Covid - nationally and personally - Boris would have made some serious steps towards a coherent levelling up. He might yet get lucky - with the UK getting through Omicron far better than mainland Europe. But I think it unlikely - France for example is boosting a million a day, well ahead of us. So it probably means 2022 is when we do have a new PM, who looks more like she/he belongs in Number 10. Or at least makes the effort to seem like they are trying to grow into the role.
Viruses that harm the hosts tend to not thrive and for very good reason, either the host dies off (killing the virus) or the host reacts in a way that harms the virus.
Some people have claimed that because there's billions of humans, that there's no evolutionary advantage for mildness, but that's not true. Humanity will react calmer to a milder virus, which allows it to spread more. Humanity will shelter or try to reduce the spread of a more virulent virus.
A more virulent virus would lead to more virulent restrictions.
If Omicron is milder then people with Omicron are going to interact more allowing it to spread more. That's an evolutionary advantage.
John Healey, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, asked:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the cost has been of maintaining the seven month deployment of the Carrier Strike Group to the Indo-Pacific to date.”
James Heappey, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, responded:
“The additional operating cost of deploying the Carrier Strike Group is currently estimated at £73 million, this covers any costs incurred above what those personnel and capabilities deployed would usually cost to defence, for example fuel costs, operational allowances, and other incidental costs. Further work is ongoing to refine those cost estimates and provide a final figure.”
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2021-12-13.91830.h&s=defence+2021-12-15..2021-12-17#g91830.q0
‘Omicron spread about 70 times quicker than Delta in human bronchial samples, a lab study found’
https://twitter.com/sciinsider/status/1471467813185503236?s=21
@stephenkb
·
7h
Some brief thoughts on that: will spread fear in the Conservative Party, weaken Boris Johnson's position as leader, and, as a result, probably makes another lockdown less likely:
And by 'less likely' I really do just think 'no, I just don't see how England locks down again in this parliament':
It really does seem as though that big Omi is going to be very, very fast in doing whatever it does. The UK's under 40s will all have had it by the end of next week if my experience is representative!
It would be interesting though to see the LD’s Top 50 targets. I doubt many are in the Marches?
One of the policy dilemmas for the LDs is that their targets are largely in seats in the SE, dominated by home-owning pensioners.
How do the LDs appeal to them without continuing the obscene featherbedding that hurts the productive part of the economy?
I’ve been waiting for data to refute it, but so far I am still waiting.
Is it too early to suggest that Boris’s Plan B was the mother of all over-reactions and that he’s needlessly sent thousands of small hospitality businesses to the wall?
Given schools are open, considering reported virulence, you'd think there'd be major reports of entire school classes or year groups coming down with it, but I've not heard much reporting of Omicron in schools at all. Does this match what you've seen or not?
It does seem a serious oddity that schools aren't all getting flooded with Omicron considering how contagious its supposed to be, why don't all children have it already?
The only thing I can think of is that Delta had already gone through schools before Omicron hit. Or do you think there's another explanation?
More seriously, this doesn't help the fight against the anti-vaxxer bullshit, as they will now spread all the crap about look look all these "state injectables" don't work.
Main stats website is still using admission within 28 days of positive test, whereas NHS now using admission with 14 days. Difference is about 10% of the total, so further increases the share of hospital beds in the covid numbers which would be occupied even without covid.
Especially worth bearing in mind for next few weeks as number of cases goes through the roof. Incidentally admissions should go up linearly with that trend so current 2-2.5k likely to rise to more like 4k in next few weeks.
I'd say any of his predecessors were more attractive. Certainly, Ashdown & Kennedy, even Swinson.
Clegg was a slimy thing that did crawl with legs across the slimy sea ... but he still had a slithery charm.
Ed Davey is almost a caricature of a smug, self-satisfied, prosperous white liberal with a public school education and PPE degree at Oxford.
In fact, I'd say his corpulent and puffing figure symbolizes the LibDem's profound lack of self-awareness, smugness and lecturing self-righteousness.
Any news on whether he has given up his consultancy yet?
I know we couldn't use Xi because China, even though it's pronounced ksi and could have been written ξ
Does anyone know why we didn't use zeta ζ and theta θ?
Pi π is a bit mathsy, but phi φ and psi ψ could be more fun.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2
It wouldn't surprise me if China were using Pfizer themselves if they could while trying to flog their own duds to the rest of the world.
Also, individuals are disposal in China....
I have to say it was very efficient, much more so than the first 2. We arrived 20 minuets early, but they where happy for us to come in, there was one person in the queue ahead of us, we whet all the way though and out in 16 minuets, meaning we left 4 minuets before we where meant to arrive.
The onw person in the queue ahead of us was a lady I think in her late 20s, and asked, 'this is my first jab, do I need to book or can I just walk in?' and it seems you don't need to book if its your first jab, so she was able to just walk in. Makes me feel very happy to see people getting there first jab.
No side effects felt so far
The strong scientific consensus is that as disease viruses evolve, their virulence (in terms of damage to the host) is pretty well random.
Its like the drug cartels, you have to get vast quantities of certain chemicals from somewhere. Even though they get their hands on them via corruption, people can estimate the amount of for instance of coke being made, because it requires some specific chemicals and you can get an estimate based on worldwide production.
In the longer-term (and humans are pretty good at accelerating the longer term) evolution will aid the milder ones though.
Milder mutations will be more likely to be allowed to spread.
The "Omicron is mild" attitude is very widespread already today, which is no doubt affecting how people are acting. If "Omicron is a death sentence" were the attitude people would be reacting differently to it.
The argument "if x then y, y is bad for reproduction, therefore not x" is definitely NOT how evolution works.
For you:
Your Appendix Could Save Your Life
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/your-appendix-could-save-your-life/
3 instant thoughts.
1 Refuk are finished. Controversy on Plan B and tens of thousands of Tory voters deserting in a massive Leave seat, and they are fifth behind the Greens.
2 Support for Boris was an ocean wide a puddle deep.
3 What the holy hell was the nonsense from MSM at poll closing time? They had the Tories winning cos of Labour votes before a vote was even counted. You get better analysis on here from amateurs than the nonsense peddled by the paid bollockers on.
https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1471818634574057483
If this virus were more deadly instead of milder, people would be acting differently to it. The fact its milder means that more people are less bothered about it spreading, so its allowed to spread more.
Evolution in action, in real time.
Falstaff: Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world.
Prince Henry: I do, I will.
With Boris as Falstaff, and Hal as everyone else.
And this, from Boris himself:
“I totally understand people’s frustrations, I hear what the voters are saying.
In all humility, I’ve got to accept that verdict”.
And the verdict is, eff off.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10320641/Fury-No10s-decision-buy-250-000-doses-Pfizers-wonder-Covid-pill.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10320621/Brit-scientist-took-year-declare-links-Chinese-lab-opposing-Covid-lab-leak-theory.html
How does this guy keep his job, time and time again?
I got an answer to your question from yesterday btw, I'm going to paraphrase because his answer was really technical and full of scientific and statistical jargon (bloody scientists!).
For the immunity groups of three doses of vaccine or higher - immunity is expected to be in the very high 90s in terms of reducing severe disease. This also includes people with an Alpha or Delta infection within the last 12 months. If 1000 people with three doses or previous infection were exposed to Omicron his model suggests 2 or 3 would present severe symptoms.
For two doses - by the same measure it's expected to be in the low 60s or high 50s. If a 1000 two dose people got exposed to Omicron he expects ~20 would get severe symptoms.
For single dose - no significant reduction, AZ recipients may have marginally reduced severity.
For the "super immune" which he classes as people with at least one dose of AZ/Pfizer and an infection within the last twelve months Omicron presents little to no danger, fewer than 1/1000 people will develop severe symptoms.
I've asked him for rough estimates of how the UK population breaks down into the categories so hopefully we'll get an update on that.
One thing about autocracies is that popular support is often a mile wide and an inch deep.
Many people don't realise what one of the catalysts for the final attack on the Tiananmen Square Square protest was. The students were being non-violent. But some of the locals were joining in and.... dealing with police and other minor functionaries of the Party in the way that happens at the end of regimes.
If they lose the acquiesce of the populace, Xi and the rest know they will be *lucky* if they get a short drop and a sudden stop.
Henry IV is Hal's dad, the Bolingbroke of Richard II.
mRNA vaccines require a vast stack of specialist equipment, operated by experts. And there is a whole bunch of domain knowledge that isn't in the "formula".