Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

It’s now odds-on that BJ will be replaced by the end of 2022 – politicalbetting.com

1356716

Comments

  • eek said:

    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.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    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.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288
    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Alistair said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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

    At least we will know very very soon
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited December 2021
    Farooq said:

    I see the narrative has moved on from "terrible for Labour" to "why do the Lib Dems even exist?" :lol:

    But, why do the LibDems even exist is a good question.

    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.
  • Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Massive over-reaction to a midterm by-election.

    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.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,188
    Alistair said:

    Endillion said:

    Alistair said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited December 2021
    Go short China and Russia

    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
  • A less sanguine take on Germany:

    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
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    Pulpstar said:

    Alistair said:

    Endillion said:

    Alistair said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    Farooq said:

    I see the narrative has moved on from "terrible for Labour" to "why do the Lib Dems even exist?" :lol:

    But, why do the LibDems even exist is a good question.

    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.
    Brilliant analogy

    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
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pulpstar said:

    Alistair said:

    Endillion said:

    Alistair said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    Look, I'm never going to say no to more data.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    Scott_xP said:

    "Johnson’s great trump card, so far, has been his popularity. But now, he’s less popular than any Prime Minister at a similar stage of his premiership since John Major in the aftermath of Black Wednesday" | Writes @FraserNelson https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/12/16/boris-johnsons-embrace-big-brother-state-goes-beyond-covid/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1639729965-1

    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561
    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.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,188
    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    However if you stick an mRNA on top of any of those then you get to very good levels of protection.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,145
    Hmmmm.

    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
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    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’



    https://twitter.com/sciinsider/status/1471467813185503236?s=21
  • 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':
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329

    Nigelb said:

    Massive over-reaction to a midterm by-election.

    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.
  • Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    As a poster pointed out earlier, we are all fecked if China's factories close down for weeks due to omi.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    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!
  • sladeslade Posts: 2,040
    Another Lib Dem gain - in Horsham.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,914
    edited December 2021

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Massive over-reaction to a midterm by-election.

    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
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    Welsh cases up a bit, deaths down a lot.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    TimS said:

    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?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    Its a good job the government made sure after last time we aren't over-reliant on China for crucial medical supplies like LFTs....oh wait....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    "Johnson’s great trump card, so far, has been his popularity. But now, he’s less popular than any Prime Minister at a similar stage of his premiership since John Major in the aftermath of Black Wednesday" | Writes @FraserNelson https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/12/16/boris-johnsons-embrace-big-brother-state-goes-beyond-covid/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1639729965-1

    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.
    He was (is) Mr anti anti-Semitic party.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    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?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    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.
  • MaxPB said:

    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.
  • MaxPB said:

    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?

    No. 🤬
  • 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.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906
    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    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.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    Like all the grown ups on trading floors trading on futures market?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298

    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…”)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    I forget was Sinopharm that was already the bullshit Chinese one, or the one that actually was OK again other variants?
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    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.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    TimS said:

    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?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802

    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.
  • Given they're using Greek letters to name the variants, I'm rather disappointed at how boring the symbols for the main ones have been so far..

    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.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    MaxPB said:

    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.
    Well China better hope it doesn't spread within the country again....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,914

    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
  • MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    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.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    Farooq said:

    I see the narrative has moved on from "terrible for Labour" to "why do the Lib Dems even exist?" :lol:

    But, why do the LibDems even exist is a good question.

    They are the political equivalent of an appendix, an evolutionary hold-over with no obvious biological function...
    Only if you're not up to date with medical thinking.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    Given they're using Greek letters to name the variants, I'm rather disappointed at how boring the symbols for the main ones have been so far..

    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.

    We did, they just weren't all that interesting.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2
  • MaxPB said:

    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.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,914
    maaarsh said:

    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
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    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.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021

    MaxPB said:

    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.

    Also, individuals are disposal in China....
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    HYUFD said:

    maaarsh said:

    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.
  • MaxPB said:

    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.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021

    MaxPB said:

    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.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Nigelb said:

    Farooq said:

    I see the narrative has moved on from "terrible for Labour" to "why do the Lib Dems even exist?" :lol:

    But, why do the LibDems even exist is a good question.

    They are the political equivalent of an appendix, an evolutionary hold-over with no obvious biological function...
    Only if you're not up to date with medical thinking.
    Citation needed :)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,889
    edited December 2021

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    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.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    eek said:

    Nigelb said:

    Massive over-reaction to a midterm by-election.

    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?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,188

    MaxPB said:

    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
  • MaxPB said:

    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.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.
  • TimS said:

    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'll put you down as a maybe.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828
    BigRich said:

    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.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    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.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited December 2021
    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828

    Given they're using Greek letters to name the variants, I'm rather disappointed at how boring the symbols for the main ones have been so far..

    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.

    So long as we don't have to go on to aleph, beth, vet, gimel ...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    Nigelb said:

    Farooq said:

    I see the narrative has moved on from "terrible for Labour" to "why do the Lib Dems even exist?" :lol:

    But, why do the LibDems even exist is a good question.

    They are the political equivalent of an appendix, an evolutionary hold-over with no obvious biological function...
    Only if you're not up to date with medical thinking.
    Citation needed :)
    Plenty since around 2007.

    For you:
    Your Appendix Could Save Your Life
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/your-appendix-could-save-your-life/
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,400
    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.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited December 2021
    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.

    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1471818634574057483
  • I just realised when I got my booster, I didn't get one of those little cards you got when you had the first two jabs. Did other people?
  • Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.

    Evolution in action, in real time.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067
    edited December 2021
    HYUFD said:

    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”.

    And the verdict is, eff off.
  • I just realised when I got my booster, I didn't get one of those little cards you got when you had the first two jabs. Did other people?

    I did.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    maaarsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    maaarsh said:

    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?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561
    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590

    I just realised when I got my booster, I didn't get one of those little cards you got when you had the first two jabs. Did other people?

    Nope, just got 'next please' shouted in my ear before she'd finished pulling the needle out
  • I just realised when I got my booster, I didn't get one of those little cards you got when you had the first two jabs. Did other people?

    Yes
  • 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

    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?
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    doses or courses - wouldn't trust mail headline to understand the distinction.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    Go short China and Russia

    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

    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.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    I just realised when I got my booster, I didn't get one of those little cards you got when you had the first two jabs. Did other people?

    Yes.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    maaarsh said:

    doses or courses - wouldn't trust mail headline to understand the distinction.
    They mean courses. Still that isn't enough.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,248

    MaxPB said:

    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.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Massive over-reaction to a midterm by-election.

    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.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Carnyx said:

    BigRich said:

    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
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,248

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    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".
  • 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.

    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1471818634574057483

    I would agree with this measure, but only alongside a 7 hour shift in daylight saving time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021
    New study on vaccine effectiveness vs Omicron..Clifnotes, two doses isn't enough. We need to pray 3 is.

    Striking Antibody Evasion Manifested by the Omicron Variant of SARS-CoV-2

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.14.472719v1
  • Gary_BurtonGary_Burton Posts: 737
    edited December 2021
    dixiedean said:

    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.

    Seemed what the LDs were saying all along was true - that they were only about 10% or so behind the Tories on postal votes and then had a massive GOTV on the day as well.

  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    BigRich said:

    maaarsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    maaarsh said:

    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?
    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/

    Primary diagnosis supplement updated on this page every Thursday with data up to the Tuesday of that week, so next week's should be interesting.

    On the latest date available, on the 6,434 hospital beds called covid on the main stats website, only 4,387 actually were, so we're running at a 50% over statement which has been growing recently.
  • Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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 probably true that, eventually, high virulence / low fatality wins out... but evolution doesn't have to go in a straight line to get there. Smallpox and ebola are pretty good examples of diseases that would thrive better if they would just play a bit nicer with their hosts, but they are fine where they are. There's no conscious planning going on, just dumb chance and brutal selection.

    (This is the bit that purist Darwinian capitalists overlook. Winning in capitalism, as in evolution, has an awful lot of luck attached to it. Also, winning at evolution requires an awful lot of losers to die, or the mechanism doesn't work.)
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    Election Maps UK
    @ElectionMapsUK
    ·
    6h
    Just for fun...

    Map if the North Shropshire by-election vote share changes were repeated across the country (UNS)

    LDM 505
    LAB 79
    SNP 37
    CON 5
    PLC 3
    GRN 1
    IND 1

    Libdems winning here
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited December 2021

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    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".
    Right...My point was even if they had all that knowledge, the production of the base chemicals and equipment, wouldn't be able to go under the radar....when even bath tub chemistry can be tracked to a certain level, as they can track the worldwide production changes in the base chemicals e.g. ether is required to wash the coke.

    And that is before you even consider can you ramp it up to produce at scale consistently.

    I put the chances that the Chinese have been producing knock-off Pfizer on any scale and nobody noticing as ridiculously low.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067
    edited December 2021
    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    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.


    https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1471790890972815363?s=20

    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.

    There's a discussion at https://theconversation.com/will-coronavirus-really-evolve-to-become-less-deadly-153817
    There is a reason, evolution.

    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.
    Philip is right to the extent that human intervention has clearly become a factor in viral evolution (cf Smallpox...).
    But the idea that a small difference in fatality rate, which shows up weeks after the initial viral spread, in something as rapidly reproducing as Covid, would make any difference, is unrealistic.
This discussion has been closed.