The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I don't see how they're wrong, unless you wish to counter.
Yes they are. Lots of people a) certainly didn't say Delta was nothing to worry about and b) are now more relaxed about Omicron...but there is also lots of nuance e.g. you can be unconcerned on a personal level, because they have looked at the data and assessed the risk, but that doesn't mean they have zero concern about the wider situation.
So who here said we needed a lockdown for Delta and now thinks we don't need to do anything for Omicron.
I'm not seeing anyone. Everyone who was cautious before is cautious now and everyone who was "herd immunity happened, lockdowns don't work" still thinks we need to do nothing.
It is people who have a different view for Omicron, that I am interested in
Me. I'm still on the cautious side. That is I'm saying it is too early to do a lap of honour, as a few were doing at least a week ago. However. The case for doing owt is unproven thus far, other than get a jab asap. I am more concerned about the framing tbh.
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Da liegt der Hund begraben.
Are you suggesting that remark is going to dog me?
'Leaves blowing in the wind' is another one I remember.
But I was talking about peculiar sentence structures rather than metaphors. For example, in Welsh 'I have a car' would literally translate as 'Dw'i'n gael car.' But that is meaningless. The correct translation is 'mae car 'da fi,' which in English would literally translate to 'there is a car with me.' Which means something altogether different.
Similarly 'sorry' is technically 'mae fflin galon 'da fi' or 'mae'n ddrwg calon da fi' which roughly translates to 'there is an unbearable pain with my heart.'* Now if you translated that into English, people might realise you were saying you felt sorry, or they might reach for a defibrillator and ring an ambulance.
*I should point out because that is one hell of a mouthful, most Welsh people just say 'sori.'
How do you say: "I am not in the office at the moment. Send any work to be translated." in Welsh?
At least it's in Welsh. I recall when Labour sent election bumf to Scotland that was bilingual in Welsh and English, though admittedly the reference to 'Welsh Labour' was a bit of a giveaway.
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Da liegt der Hund begraben.
Are you suggesting that remark is going to dog me?
'Leaves blowing in the wind' is another one I remember.
But I was talking about peculiar sentence structures rather than metaphors. For example, in Welsh 'I have a car' would literally translate as 'Dw'i'n gael car.' But that is meaningless. The correct translation is 'mae car 'da fi,' which in English would literally translate to 'there is a car with me.' Which means something altogether different.
Similarly 'sorry' is technically 'mae fflin galon 'da fi' or 'mae'n ddrwg calon da fi' which roughly translates to 'there is an unbearable pain with my heart.'* Now if you translated that into English, people might realise you were saying you felt sorry, or they might reach for a defibrillator and ring an ambulance.
*I should point out because that is one hell of a mouthful, most Welsh people just say 'sori.'
How do you say: "I am not in the office at the moment. Send any work to be translated." in Welsh?
At least it's in Welsh. I recall when Labour sent election bumf to Scotland that was bilingual in Welsh and English, though admittedly the reference to 'Welsh Labour' was a bit of a giveaway.
Not a translation, but I like the Labour candidates (*) in ?2015? who sent out election literature with boilerplate 'insert candidate info here' in.
(*) I daresay candidates for other parties have done similar.
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Absolutely. In the context of a Bible translation, it is likely to be an attempt to follow the correct corresponding words and structure of the original text - but understanding the process is v. important. May lead to eg a version stilted in English, but if being used for eg study in sermon prep. then the compromise would be worth it.
Whilst a version designed more for public reading is likely to give more emphasis to fluency in the English expression.
I had a friend who went to do Bible Translation in Ougadougou. Interesting conversations.
On NIV - yes a very good translation but that had a bit of a habit of following evangelical ideas, by comparison with say the Jerusalem Bible, which had a bit of an RC fingerprint.
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
"This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. "
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
I am getting quite frustrated by the rather blank statements people are making.
Even the when vaccines first were released, nobody with any standing said that would be it, COVID would be eradicated from the face of the earth. In fact they said the opposite, COVID is here for a long time to come and there will be other variants. And you will all catch it at some point.
What they said was it would break the link between COVID and serious illness and death. All the evidence is this is still true, even with this new variant, especially if you had a booster.
If you aren't very old or have other significant vulnerabilities, COVID really is not a high risk to you. Boris said today 90% of people in ICU are not fully vaccinated. I am a little bit taken aback by that claim, but we know from other sources 70% of cases have for a long time been unvaccinated and hospitalisations are massively over represented by them, ~50% of admissions.
The two things that has found to be flawed from the initial assessment was it was hoped that the vaccines would really clamp down on transmission between two vaccinated people and there is a waning in protection (but that can be fixed with another shot).
These are unfortunate and less than ideal. But it isn't like the scientists are sitting on their hands doing jack shit. We will get better versions of the vaccine, and they are already working on a much more generalised one.
He's 11 and vaxxed (albeit with a pediatric dose). No-one else in the family has tested positive, and we're all fully vaxxed.
His symptoms are cold like with a sore throat.
Really sorry to hear that Robert. The very best for the young man and a good and quick recovery.
The virus has really increase in virulence. We weren't actually due to go skiing until tomorrow, so it actually reached us before we'd gotten to the slopes.
Today's big jump in Covid data is grim reading for No10. Hospitalisations have always been the key metric, not cases. A Cabinet minister told me some months ago that the NHS would start to seriously struggle if admissions ever pass 10,000 again. In England alone today... (1) https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1476296473897754628
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Da liegt der Hund begraben.
Are you suggesting that remark is going to dog me?
'Leaves blowing in the wind' is another one I remember.
But I was talking about peculiar sentence structures rather than metaphors. For example, in Welsh 'I have a car' would literally translate as 'Dw'i'n gael car.' But that is meaningless. The correct translation is 'mae car 'da fi,' which in English would literally translate to 'there is a car with me.' Which means something altogether different.
Similarly 'sorry' is technically 'mae fflin galon 'da fi' or 'mae'n ddrwg calon da fi' which roughly translates to 'there is an unbearable pain with my heart.'* Now if you translated that into English, people might realise you were saying you felt sorry, or they might reach for a defibrillator and ring an ambulance.
*I should point out because that is one hell of a mouthful, most Welsh people just say 'sori.'
How do you say: "I am not in the office at the moment. Send any work to be translated." in Welsh?
I still cannot believe that story however many times I see it. Why would the in-house translation service of a local authority have an out of office message solely in the language they are likely most often asked to translate things into?
Even if they also do translations from Welsh into other languages, which they probably do, they surely had done English to Welsh translation before and would have an out of office in both languages as a practical consideration? I feel like there's another story of the people making the request not noticing the English out of office message at the same time perhaps.
Today's big jump in Covid data is grim reading for No10. Hospitalisations have always been the key metric, not cases. A Cabinet minister told me some months ago that the NHS would start to seriously struggle if admissions ever pass 10,000 again. In England alone today... (1)
...total hosptalisations hit 10,462, and the number of daily admissions in the last 24 hours was up to 1,751 - double what it was 10 days ago and close to half of January 2021's peak of 4,000 a day. Plus, these admissions are largely all cases contracted before xmas meet ups (2)
If we are recommending movies/TV I have two new favourites
The first is "Dopesick" - an eight part Disney/Hulu miniseries about the rise of opioid abuse in the USA, punted by Big Pharma and the Sackler Family (who really are represented as comic book Jewish villains, almost to the point of anti-Semitism, and yet by all accounts the portrait is realistic). The narrative jumps around time wise, to an annoying extent, but the emotional power builds, as well. Compelling, and harrowing
The other is "The Great". A riotous, ribald, often fictional romp through the rise and rise of Catherine the Great of Russia. Expect lots of swearing, nudity, eye-gouging, scatological humour, mummified queens and death. It is of course full of made-up stories and dialogue, and yet from my reading of Russian history, it is also quite a faithful depiction of the lurid insanity of the Russian upper classes and their orgiastic drinking/fighting during the time of Peter the Great and his daughter-in-law Catherine. Brilliant fun.
Omicron may be less severe, but we look far from out of the woods yet. With SAGE urging him to go further on one side and his MPs on the other warning him not to, that tightrope of a political decision for Boris Johnson on whether to tighten restrictions just got even harder (3)
It’s great to know England is safe in the collective hands of the 1922 Committee, 100 Tory backbenchers and the Telegraph, Mail, Express and Sun (our de facto government)- and the advice of “doom-laden” public health experts ignored. What a strange democracy in which we live. https://twitter.com/williamnhutton/status/1476273893577003016
You keep saying this, is there any chance of you elaborating? What scenario do you envisage for the UK, Europe, the world?
Genuine question. Just coming on here and saying "Oo-er" is not especially enlightening
And yes I know I do it all the time but at least I endeavour to entertain, mostly
I posted a lot earlier Leon.
I think with the large number of cases, mutations are likely which could evade vaccines and/or be more dangerous as we saw with delta.
The people in hospital is going one way: up.
I think we're in trouble. I still hope I am wrong but I am no longer unworried as I was a few days ago.
My hospital has installed a fixed multi-user holding ambulance to help unload. There were 25 ambulances on the forecourt tonight as I walked out. It looks pretty grim in terms of capacity.
Some mistake surely. The PB virology experts assure me tis just a cold. So what you describe can't be real...
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
"This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. "
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
Key workers, shoppers etc
Even in a strict lockdown enough people leave the house that transmission doesn't end.
Any lockdown would have to be far, far stricter than anything we've attempted to halt transmission.
If we are recommending movies/TV I have two new favourites
The first is "Dopesick" - an eight part Disney/Hulu miniseries about the rise of opioid abuse in the USA, punted by Big Pharma and the Sackler Family (who really are represented as comic book Jewish villains, almost to the point of anti-Semitism, and yet by all accounts the portrait is realistic). The narrative jumps around time wise, to an annoying extent, but the emotional power builds, as well. Compelling, and harrowing
The other is "The Great". A riotous, ribald, often fictional romp through the rise and rise of Catherine the Great of Russia. Expect lots of swearing, nudity, eye-gouging, scatological humour, mummified queens and death. It is of course full of made-up stories and dialogue, and yet from my reading of Russian history, it is also quite a faithful depiction of the lurid insanity of the Russian upper classes and their orgiastic drinking/fighting during the time of Peter the Great and his daughter-in-law Catherine. Brilliant fun.
I got Empire of Pain for Christmas, and am looking forward to reading it.
You keep saying this, is there any chance of you elaborating? What scenario do you envisage for the UK, Europe, the world?
Genuine question. Just coming on here and saying "Oo-er" is not especially enlightening
And yes I know I do it all the time but at least I endeavour to entertain, mostly
I posted a lot earlier Leon.
I think with the large number of cases, mutations are likely which could evade vaccines and/or be more dangerous as we saw with delta.
The people in hospital is going one way: up.
I think we're in trouble. I still hope I am wrong but I am no longer unworried as I was a few days ago.
My hospital has installed a fixed multi-user holding ambulance to help unload. There were 25 ambulances on the forecourt tonight as I walked out. It looks pretty grim in terms of capacity.
Some mistake surely. The PB virology experts assure me tis just a cold. So what you describe can't be real...
It's mostly the anti-vax nutters we endlessly talk about.
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Absolutely. In the context of a Bible translation, it is likely to be an attempt to follow the correct corresponding words and structure of the original text - but understanding the process is v. important. May lead to eg a version stilted in English, but if being used for eg study in sermon prep. then the compromise would be worth it.
Whilst a version designed more for public reading is likely to give more emphasis to fluency in the English expression.
I had a friend who went to do Bible Translation in Ougadougou. Interesting conversations.
On NIV - yes a very good translation but that had a bit of a habit of following evangelical ideas, by comparison with say the Jerusalem Bible, which had a bit of an RC fingerprint.
I grew up on the Good News Bible, although NIV is my go to today. That said the majesty of the KJV for high ceremony is unrivalled
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
"This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. "
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
Depends how "strict". I think we're generally all agreed that we aren't going down the Chinese route of sealing people into their own homes and having the army deliver food (or not), so any lockdown will necessarily allow people to go shopping for essentials (and possibly exercise once a day) - which means it's impossible to get contact points down to zero.
By your logic (and ignoring for a moment the reporting issue others raise) the English had more common sense than anyone else at the beginning of November then because they had the lowest case rate, briefly?
That might have something to do with not reporting data for 3 days...what idiot thinks cases are down on average in any of the nations? The number of average cases halved in 3 days.....FFS some people are morons.
Furthermore, Sturgeon and Drakeford as saying the opposite, they are up and will go much much higher.....
There might be a case they aren't rising as fast as in England, but we don't know at the moment, but they certainly aren't going down.
Just out of interest. If an anti-vaxxer had a change of heart and got a jab tomorrow - what would their level of protection be against Omicron relative to someone who had their third dose booster on the same day? Approximately.
What I'm trying to understand is - is the high level of protection from the third dose specifically, or having A dose more recently? Or in other words - are anti-vaxxers fucked regardless now because they would need the significant period of time to get all 3 doses in to "catch up", or is there still significant material benefit from getting a single jab in that would be worth an ad campaign in of itself?
He's 11 and vaxxed (albeit with a pediatric dose). No-one else in the family has tested positive, and we're all fully vaxxed.
His symptoms are cold like with a sore throat.
Really sorry to hear that Robert. The very best for the young man and a good and quick recovery.
The virus has really increase in virulence. We weren't actually due to go skiing until tomorrow, so it actually reached us before we'd gotten to the slopes.
It has not increased in "virulence" (ie "severity" or "harmfulness") it has increased in transmissibility
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Absolutely. In the context of a Bible translation, it is likely to be an attempt to follow the correct corresponding words and structure of the original text - but understanding the process is v. important. May lead to eg a version stilted in English, but if being used for eg study in sermon prep. then the compromise would be worth it.
Whilst a version designed more for public reading is likely to give more emphasis to fluency in the English expression.
I had a friend who went to do Bible Translation in Ougadougou. Interesting conversations.
On NIV - yes a very good translation but that had a bit of a habit of following evangelical ideas, by comparison with say the Jerusalem Bible, which had a bit of an RC fingerprint.
I grew up on the Good News Bible, although NIV is my go to today. That said the majesty of the KJV for high ceremony is unrivalled
I prefer the Beano. The stories are more realistic, and who wouldn't want to follow the religion of Dennis?
Just out of interest. If an anti-vaxxer had a change of heart and got a jab tomorrow - what would their level of protection be against Omicron relative to someone who had their third dose booster on the same day? Approximately.
What I'm trying to understand is - is the high level of protection from the third dose specifically, or having A dose more recently? Or in other words - are anti-vaxxers fucked regardless now because they would need the significant period of time to get all 3 doses in to "catch up", or is there still significant material benefit from getting a single jab in that would be worth an ad campaign in of itself?
British citizens settled in the EU with legal status guaranteed under withdrawal agreement cannot return home if they are transiting through France. This is what Brexit 31st December means.
That might have something to do with not reporting data for 3 days...what idiot thinks cases are down on average in any of the nations? The number of actual average cases halved in 3 days.....FFS some people are morons.
Furthermore, Sturgeon and Drakeford as saying the opposite, they are up and will go much much higher.....
There might be a case they aren't rising as fast as in England, but we don't know at the moment, but they certainly aren't going down.
I’m sure Scott can be sensible sometimes, but seriously, the only thing ever posted is some rubbish that confirms his own internal bias
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Absolutely. In the context of a Bible translation, it is likely to be an attempt to follow the correct corresponding words and structure of the original text - but understanding the process is v. important. May lead to eg a version stilted in English, but if being used for eg study in sermon prep. then the compromise would be worth it.
Whilst a version designed more for public reading is likely to give more emphasis to fluency in the English expression.
I had a friend who went to do Bible Translation in Ougadougou. Interesting conversations.
On NIV - yes a very good translation but that had a bit of a habit of following evangelical ideas, by comparison with say the Jerusalem Bible, which had a bit of an RC fingerprint.
I grew up on the Good News Bible, although NIV is my go to today. That said the majesty of the KJV for high ceremony is unrivalled
My preference when I refer to it is still the New Jerusalem Bible.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
It's the principle. If you are charging people for the national resources they use.
That's not a principle. We already charge people for resources all the time: alcohol, tobacco, petrol, diesel etc are taxed through the roof. Get over it.
Quite. Let’s see how it looks once ALL the Xmas/NY data is in - England is reporting far more regularly - for example, NI dropped 5 days’ worth today. And Scotland is taking quite a break over NY.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
All Brexiter hyperbole.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined will bother to actually make the effort, now saying “no tourist travel from the UK” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Personally, I don’t think many if any of the travel restrictions these past two years have made much sense or much difference.
I know this won't endear me to OGH, but the LDs are, and have been since Clegg, diabolical rubbish. You'd be an idiot to vote for them, but the fact that many still do so illustrates their opportunity. It must set a record for open goals.
I'm not sure any party gets into government by being 'not another'.
I had another thought recently (they come occaisionally) Should Labour get very close to a majority, but need SNP support I'm pretty sure that the Tories would choose to bail them out rather than see the break-up of the Union.
Now that does sound like a coalition of chaos. Starmer driving with Johnson navigating.
I didn't say it was good, I'm sure it wouldn't be Boris (if Labour are the largest party he's certainly long gone), and it'd be a bit of a stitch-up against the nationalists (of course it becomes a choice between stitch-ups)
Labour really must struggle with the idea of involving the SNP. If I was them I'd prefer to deal with the devil. (How is Mandelson?)
If we are recommending movies/TV I have two new favourites
The first is "Dopesick" - an eight part Disney/Hulu miniseries about the rise of opioid abuse in the USA, punted by Big Pharma and the Sackler Family (who really are represented as comic book Jewish villains, almost to the point of anti-Semitism, and yet by all accounts the portrait is realistic). The narrative jumps around time wise, to an annoying extent, but the emotional power builds, as well. Compelling, and harrowing
The other is "The Great". A riotous, ribald, often fictional romp through the rise and rise of Catherine the Great of Russia. Expect lots of swearing, nudity, eye-gouging, scatological humour, mummified queens and death. It is of course full of made-up stories and dialogue, and yet from my reading of Russian history, it is also quite a faithful depiction of the lurid insanity of the Russian upper classes and their orgiastic drinking/fighting during the time of Peter the Great and his daughter-in-law Catherine. Brilliant fun.
I got Empire of Pain for Christmas, and am looking forward to reading it.
The American pharmaceutical industry is a strange strange thing. Capable of incredible breakthroughs and great scientific achievements, but Jesus there is a darkside. A streak of outright evil. Dopesick explains it deftly and movingly
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
All Brexiter hyperbole.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined make the effort - actually saying “no tourist travel” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Hmm, unusual for the PB Brexiters, sorry Decembrists, to be blaming Brexit rather than covid for something.
If we are recommending movies/TV I have two new favourites
The first is "Dopesick" - an eight part Disney/Hulu miniseries about the rise of opioid abuse in the USA, punted by Big Pharma and the Sackler Family (who really are represented as comic book Jewish villains, almost to the point of anti-Semitism, and yet by all accounts the portrait is realistic). The narrative jumps around time wise, to an annoying extent, but the emotional power builds, as well. Compelling, and harrowing
The other is "The Great". A riotous, ribald, often fictional romp through the rise and rise of Catherine the Great of Russia. Expect lots of swearing, nudity, eye-gouging, scatological humour, mummified queens and death. It is of course full of made-up stories and dialogue, and yet from my reading of Russian history, it is also quite a faithful depiction of the lurid insanity of the Russian upper classes and their orgiastic drinking/fighting during the time of Peter the Great and his daughter-in-law Catherine. Brilliant fun.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
All Brexiter hyperbole.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined will bother to actually make the effort, now saying “no tourist travel from the UK” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Are they restricting the rights of their own citizens to travel abroad, or is this just a hypocritical overreaction?
British citizens settled in the EU with legal status guaranteed under withdrawal agreement cannot return home if they are transiting through France. This is what Brexit 31st December means.
I know this won't endear me to OGH, but the LDs are, and have been since Clegg, diabolical rubbish. You'd be an idiot to vote for them, but the fact that many still do so illustrates their opportunity. It must set a record for open goals.
I'm not sure any party gets into government by being 'not another'.
I had another thought recently (they come occaisionally) Should Labour get very close to a majority, but need SNP support I'm pretty sure that the Tories would choose to bail them out rather than see the break-up of the Union.
Now that does sound like a coalition of chaos. Starmer driving with Johnson navigating.
I didn't say it was good, I'm sure it wouldn't be Boris (if Labour are the largest party he's certainly long gone), and it'd be a bit of a stitch-up against the nationalists (of course it becomes a choice between stitch-ups)
Labour really must struggle with the idea of involving the SNP. If I was them I'd prefer to deal with the devil. (How is Mandelson?)
Labour supported the Tories in 2014 and look what has happened in Scotland to them as a result. That has some bearing on the matter.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
All Brexiter hyperbole.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined will bother to actually make the effort, now saying “no tourist travel from the UK” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Are they restricting the rights of their own citizens to travel abroad, or is this just a hypocritical overreaction?
Yes, to travel from France to the UK you (or they, since Brits can return) also need a “compelling reason”
Taking back control never felt so good but this is casus belli isn't it?
URGENT UPDATE FOR BRITISH RESIDENTS IN EU: Following a French Government decision, on 28/12/2021, unless they hold French residency, British citizens are now considered 3rd country citizens and can no longer transit France by road to reach their country of residence in the EU.
I have a sense Macron would still be doing this kind of nonsense even if we were still in the EU.....blaming the roast beef is Macron go to criticism.
There's a remarkable interview on Twitter (I might try and locate it when I'm not knackered from tax returning) where a French eurosceptic is interviewed by a French journalist about Franco-British relations. It's a serious interview, the pundit is not a lunatic
Basically, we are doomed to a Cold War with France for years if not decades. Why? Because the super-europhile French view Brexit as an Exocet aimed directly at the greatest project of post-war France - European Unification (under French leadership, begrudgingly shared with Berlin). The EU is all that France really cares about, foreign-policy-wise, as they see it as the only way to assert French power globally, now France is relatively so small, compared to the USA, China, and other rising powers like India
A "successful" Brexit is a mortal and perpetual peril to this ambition. If it is ever seen to happen it will encourage other more reluctant members of the EU tribe (Poland, Hungary, maybe Sweden and Denmark, even Greece and Italy) to copy the UK, thus members will topple away like dominoes and the EU will crumble.
Therefore Brexit cannot succeed, not only that it must be punished continuously, and Britain must be singled out for worse treatment than any other 3rd country, in perpetuity (because the French have no other idea how to handle Brexit, such it their hatred and fear of it)
Hence shit like this. Britain is deliberately being targetted by the Frogs, and this is going to go on for a long, long time, and we can expect no better from any other president - Macron is just more honest in his petulant anger than some
The UK needs to adjust to France as an overtly hostile power, for the long term. Once we accept this we can of course react, accordingly
Good job there's no sign of a successful Brexit then. Phew! Stand down.
It's just a speculation but at some point an issue will be tested. Astonishingly the EU has thus far, while acquiring a number of state like trappings has placed having a common currency, and common standards for fruit pies and My Little Pony stickers, ahead of having a common defence alliance.
One day, and it is getting nearer, an attack on a negligible piece of EU territory in some distant part of Lithuania or Finland of which we know nothing will occur and we will wake up to discover that the EU has a common line on the sugar content of fruit gums but no common line on what to do when attacked, nor the means to discover one. At that point Ireland will be worried about fruit gum regulation while it watches an attack on EU territory from the stands. The EU could not survive this.
It’s great to know England is safe in the collective hands of the 1922 Committee, 100 Tory backbenchers and the Telegraph, Mail, Express and Sun (our de facto government)- and the advice of “doom-laden” public health experts ignored. What a strange democracy in which we live. https://twitter.com/williamnhutton/status/1476273893577003016
Advisors advising and ministers deciding with the input of elected MPs.
I love the way my use of 'version' rather than 'translation' about the bible has led to a heated discussion.
After which I am none the wiser! Even if I used the wrong word, I think everyone knew what I meant ..
I would say you used the right word, actually. The different translations of the Bible are called 'versions.' It's just that they differ in more than the words used, because of the different materials they use for that translation. Which is not as widely appreciated as perhaps it should be.
There is a reason why traditionally clergy were supposed to know Greek and Hebrew - so that issue wouldn't affect them.
Also differ in the audiences.
Crudely, say the difference between a children's bible, one designed for elementary speakers of English, and one aimed at being a literal translation not a paraphrase.
I'm always wary of those books that claim to be 'literal translations.' For example, I believe you can literally translate German, as it is a very literal language, but nobody who is not actually unhinged would try to 'literally' translate Welsh into English as it is so idiomatic it would come out as meaningless drivel.
To the credit of the NIV, they make it clear from the start that they didn't try a 'literal' translation: rather, they went to enormous efforts to ensure what they had written as far as possible accurately reflected the meaning of the original.
Da liegt der Hund begraben.
Are you suggesting that remark is going to dog me?
'Leaves blowing in the wind' is another one I remember.
But I was talking about peculiar sentence structures rather than metaphors. For example, in Welsh 'I have a car' would literally translate as 'Dw'i'n gael car.' But that is meaningless. The correct translation is 'mae car 'da fi,' which in English would literally translate to 'there is a car with me.' Which means something altogether different.
Similarly 'sorry' is technically 'mae fflin galon 'da fi' or 'mae'n ddrwg calon da fi' which roughly translates to 'there is an unbearable pain with my heart.'* Now if you translated that into English, people might realise you were saying you felt sorry, or they might reach for a defibrillator and ring an ambulance.
*I should point out because that is one hell of a mouthful, most Welsh people just say 'sori.'
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
"This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. "
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
I think at this point, you'd have to go for a weld-people-shut-into-their-apartment-blocks style lockdown to get the necessary compliance, and I don't think that's compatible with western democracy. Or a functioning economy.
Then, you have all the people who can't WFH. Delivery drivers. Bin men. Nuclear power technicians. Meat packers at slaughterhouses. Plumbers (Imagine if your loo broke down during lockdown...).
Plus people still have to go out for other reasons. Cancer patients need treatment, people who've sat on their specs need new specs. Sick pet dogs need to go to the vets.
Then take all the people who simply won't comply. Whether that be fifty thousand anti vaxxers descending on Trafalgar square for a demo, or five thousand teenagers descending on a field in the Forest of Dean for a lockdown rave and some good old fashioned drug taking. Are you going to send in the police (or the tanks) to stop them? Then see point A, about western democracy, above.
And even if, even if you do through some miracle manage to get enough people locked in their houses either voluntarily or coercively, to get R under 1, all you are really doing is delaying those cases, because as soon as they're out again (or if you get to zero covid, until someone flies in on a private jet and doesn't quarantine) you're back to square one again in a month, because that's how fast this thing travels. Which means you've butchered your economy for however many months lockdown lasts, all to end up back to square one in a month. And you still have the problem of the unvaxxed.
So yes, you might be able to get R under 1 for a period of time, if you're willing to suspend pretty much everything that makes us a liberal democracy and accept the entire economy grinding to a halt as a result. Only to watch omicron cases jump up the second you loosen the rules.
But when most of us are double or triple jabbed, that would be the most extraordinary and pointless act of self harm.
So, possible to get R under 1 again? Maybe. Possibly. With draconian restrictions. Worth it? Almost certainly not.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
All Brexiter hyperbole.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined will bother to actually make the effort, now saying “no tourist travel from the UK” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Are they restricting the rights of their own citizens to travel abroad, or is this just a hypocritical overreaction?
Yes, to travel from France to the UK you (or they, since Brits can return) also need a “compelling reason”
Just to the UK? I suppose that's the only place Covid is nowadays.
You keep saying this, is there any chance of you elaborating? What scenario do you envisage for the UK, Europe, the world?
Genuine question. Just coming on here and saying "Oo-er" is not especially enlightening
And yes I know I do it all the time but at least I endeavour to entertain, mostly
I posted a lot earlier Leon.
I think with the large number of cases, mutations are likely which could evade vaccines and/or be more dangerous as we saw with delta.
The people in hospital is going one way: up.
I think we're in trouble. I still hope I am wrong but I am no longer unworried as I was a few days ago.
My hospital has installed a fixed multi-user holding ambulance to help unload. There were 25 ambulances on the forecourt tonight as I walked out. It looks pretty grim in terms of capacity.
Some mistake surely. The PB virology experts assure me tis just a cold. So what you describe can't be real...
Here it is:
Though most of those stuck in the ambulances unable to offload are with other conditions.
"The Cabinet might not agree on what levelling up is but filling in potholes for a Conservative Peer is definitely not it. How many streets in Britain have had 330k to repair their roads? Ministers must come clean on how these shocking decisions are made."
He's 11 and vaxxed (albeit with a pediatric dose). No-one else in the family has tested positive, and we're all fully vaxxed.
His symptoms are cold like with a sore throat.
Really sorry to hear that Robert. The very best for the young man and a good and quick recovery.
The virus has really increase in virulence. We weren't actually due to go skiing until tomorrow, so it actually reached us before we'd gotten to the slopes.
It has not increased in "virulence" (ie "severity" or "harmfulness") it has increased in transmissibility
You are correct.
I was just making a gag about how it's all due to Middle Class Remainer Skiiers.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Refuser-initiated lockdown has to be treated as a material possibility. They do constitute the bulk of critical care Covid patients in British hospitals, and reports from other countries in Europe suggest that most of their Covid dead are also unvaccinated.
As things currently stand the rap sheet against the refusers consists of the suffering of everybody who has been harmed, crippled or died through lack of diagnostics and treatment that they would've received if the healthcare system wasn't burdened by all these additional Covid patients. If they cause a lockdown then you can add to that all of the consequences of the resultant business closures, the expense to the taxpayer of resuming furlough and other support schemes, and the physical and mental health consequences of yet another period of house arrest for the entire population.
Refusers deserve all of the opprobrium that is being heaped upon them. They're a menace.
No. I believe it would be morally wrong to impose a lockdown on the general population because we had decided it was morally wrong to force medical treatment (i.e. the vaccine) onto people.
If people who refuse to receive the protection afforded by the vaccine are causing pressure on the NHS then we should add some additional capacity to provide them with palliative care.
The comparison to mountaineers from Topping is completely bunk. No-one is suggesting imposing a lockdown because of the risk that a small number of mountaineers might subsequently need medical treatment if we don't keep the whole country locked up. The situation is completely different.
This is a simple option. It does not require compulsory vaccinations. Unvaccinated people would lose their automatic eligibility for NHS COVID treatment. Potentially the penalty for being unvaccinated would be death from COVID, but people could still choose whether to get vaccinated or not.
British citizens settled in the EU with legal status guaranteed under withdrawal agreement cannot return home if they are transiting through France. This is what Brexit 31st December means.
That might have something to do with not reporting data for 3 days...what idiot thinks cases are down on average in any of the nations? The number of average cases halved in 3 days.....FFS some people are morons.
Furthermore, Sturgeon and Drakeford as saying the opposite, they are up and will go much much higher.....
There might be a case they aren't rising as fast as in England, but we don't know at the moment, but they certainly aren't going down.
Yeah what I would take from that if I believed it was a true representation of the current state of play is that Omicron can be crushed by a little bit more social distancing. Hurrah!
Obviously as I am not a flaming idiot I do not think that.
"The Cabinet might not agree on what levelling up is but filling in potholes for a Conservative Peer is definitely not it. How many streets in Britain have had 330k to repair their roads? Ministers must come clean on how these shocking decisions are made."
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
"This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. "
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
Key workers, shoppers etc
Even in a strict lockdown enough people leave the house that transmission doesn't end.
Any lockdown would have to be far, far stricter than anything we've attempted to halt transmission.
Yes, but key workers can wear N95 masks. And the reality is that you can do shopping by internet orders and picking things up.
Just look at the lockdowns in Asia - people would literally not leave their apartments for six or seven weeks. If you did something like that, you could easily get the R below 1.
I'm not saying it's a good idea (it's not), but we could get R below 1 by implementing an incredibly strict lockdown that resulted in 95% of the population not leaving their homes.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
It’s great to know England is safe in the collective hands of the 1922 Committee, 100 Tory backbenchers and the Telegraph, Mail, Express and Sun (our de facto government)- and the advice of “doom-laden” public health experts ignored. What a strange democracy in which we live. https://twitter.com/williamnhutton/status/1476273893577003016
Advisors advising and ministers deciding with the input of elected MPs.
What a strange democracy ...
Whether one agrees with the recent decision or not, and notwithstanding the usual worry about influence of the press, that was a rather odd way of criticising it - that the PM feels he lacks legislative support for doing more may be many things, but undemocratic it isn't.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
By blocking French residents of France, too. Not to mention the Belgians etc.
Is everyone worried that anti vaxxers will put pressure on the NHS thus locking everyone down.
@JosiasJessop called them murderous bastards. Who are they murdering.
Themselves - and anyone else who dies because ICU beds are taken / blocked by anti-vaxxers who would otherwise have not been so seriously ill.
Slippery slope. What about Mountaineers.
When was the last date the ICU was filled with thousands of Mountaineers?
I'll wait for an answer.
It's the principle. If you are charging people for the national resources they use.
That's not a principle. We already charge people for resources all the time: alcohol, tobacco, petrol, diesel etc are taxed through the roof. Get over it.
You make a crap libertarian.
People should be free to make their own choices, but some choices come at a cost. That's entirely libertarian.
Don't want to pay the price? Why should others pay it for you?
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
By blocking French residents of France, too. Not to mention the Belgians etc.
Earlier reports on this suggested French citizens were not restricted at all. But I can't find the source.
You keep saying this, is there any chance of you elaborating? What scenario do you envisage for the UK, Europe, the world?
Genuine question. Just coming on here and saying "Oo-er" is not especially enlightening
And yes I know I do it all the time but at least I endeavour to entertain, mostly
I posted a lot earlier Leon.
I think with the large number of cases, mutations are likely which could evade vaccines and/or be more dangerous as we saw with delta.
The people in hospital is going one way: up.
I think we're in trouble. I still hope I am wrong but I am no longer unworried as I was a few days ago.
My hospital has installed a fixed multi-user holding ambulance to help unload. There were 25 ambulances on the forecourt tonight as I walked out. It looks pretty grim in terms of capacity.
Some mistake surely. The PB virology experts assure me tis just a cold. So what you describe can't be real...
Here it is:
Though most of those stuck in the ambulances unable to offload are with other conditions.
Thanks for the photo. Note to PB Virology experts - when you say "no threat to the NHS" and the NHS have the evidence of exactly what the threat is, ask yourselves who may be in the know...
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
Are the blocking British? Or just anyone who isn't EU/Schengen?
DW - German case numbers are much higher than reported
There is a known long term shortage of personnel running the system and this shows during holidays as not enough people to do the testing or process the results. Potential collapse of the testing infrastructure in the coming weeks if infections increase. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU7VPAvN61Q
But apparently the UK testing system is utter shit...
The incredible sudden drop in Welsh Omicron cases, correctly cited by the ever-perceptive @Scott_xP, is no statistical glitch - it's happened because the brilliant Mark Drakeford reimposed one-way shopping in Wales as of -- checks notes -- two days ago.
We all know the virus is completely foiled by people walking around shops in a slightly slower and more confused way, so it is no wonder the pandemic has almost disappeared in Wales in 48 hours. "The Drake" may be many things - a world class statesman, a famed duellist, a recent Olympic ski jumper, and a cruelly and brutally effective womanizer - but he is no fool
Taking back control never felt so good but this is casus belli isn't it?
URGENT UPDATE FOR BRITISH RESIDENTS IN EU: Following a French Government decision, on 28/12/2021, unless they hold French residency, British citizens are now considered 3rd country citizens and can no longer transit France by road to reach their country of residence in the EU.
I have a sense Macron would still be doing this kind of nonsense even if we were still in the EU.....blaming the roast beef is Macron go to criticism.
There's a remarkable interview on Twitter (I might try and locate it when I'm not knackered from tax returning) where a French eurosceptic is interviewed by a French journalist about Franco-British relations. It's a serious interview, the pundit is not a lunatic
Basically, we are doomed to a Cold War with France for years if not decades. Why? Because the super-europhile French view Brexit as an Exocet aimed directly at the greatest project of post-war France - European Unification (under French leadership, begrudgingly shared with Berlin). The EU is all that France really cares about, foreign-policy-wise, as they see it as the only way to assert French power globally, now France is relatively so small, compared to the USA, China, and other rising powers like India
A "successful" Brexit is a mortal and perpetual peril to this ambition. If it is ever seen to happen it will encourage other more reluctant members of the EU tribe (Poland, Hungary, maybe Sweden and Denmark, even Greece and Italy) to copy the UK, thus members will topple away like dominoes and the EU will crumble.
Therefore Brexit cannot succeed, not only that it must be punished continuously, and Britain must be singled out for worse treatment than any other 3rd country, in perpetuity (because the French have no other idea how to handle Brexit, such it their hatred and fear of it)
Hence shit like this. Britain is deliberately being targetted by the Frogs, and this is going to go on for a long, long time, and we can expect no better from any other president - Macron is just more honest in his petulant anger than some
The UK needs to adjust to France as an overtly hostile power, for the long term. Once we accept this we can of course react, accordingly
Good job there's no sign of a successful Brexit then. Phew! Stand down.
It's just a speculation but at some point an issue will be tested. Astonishingly the EU has thus far, while acquiring a number of state like trappings has placed having a common currency, and common standards for fruit pies and My Little Pony stickers, ahead of having a common defence alliance.
One day, and it is getting nearer, an attack on a negligible piece of EU territory in some distant part of Lithuania or Finland of which we know nothing will occur and we will wake up to discover that the EU has a common line on the sugar content of fruit gums but no common line on what to do when attacked, nor the means to discover one. At that point Ireland will be worried about fruit gum regulation while it watches an attack on EU territory from the stands. The EU could not survive this.
That Germany will not fight, or even allow Ukraine to be armed is known.
The question that various Eastern European friends ask, is where the stopping point is? The Baltics? Poland?
If you've had your jabs and your booster, it's almost certainly nothing more than a bad cold.
If you're clinically vulnerable, or very old, you can shield, you can go into voluntary lockdown for a couple of months. Or take your chances with it as you would any flu season (my elderly relatives, for example, would rather live out the time they have with family than spend it cowering in their rooms and never seeing anyone).
This variant is contagious enough that not even a strict lockdown could get R below 1. So it's going to go through the population anyway. All another lockdown will achieve is more economic, mental and physical harm on those of us who have done the right thing and gotten jabbed and boosted.
The anti-vax contingent may be in big trouble, however. If it does look like the NHS is going to be overwhelmed then, frankly, at this point f*** 'em.
Open up the nightingale hospitals and give the unvaxxed palliative care only. Prioritise NHS beds for those who have been vaccinated, especially the elderly and clinically vulnerable. Introduce an immediate covid tax on all the unvaccinated. And let it run its course.
It's TINA at this point, with a variant as contagious as omicron. You'll never get the R below 1 again, you won't get enough people complying with total lockdown and people still need to go to work, to deliver food, to man the power stations, to empty the bins. All you will be able to do is inflict a year more of misery and drudgery on the population, until they eventually riot, stop following the rules entirely), or turf you out of office.
The pandemic is over (or will be once the omicron wave sweeps the country), no matter how much you want to proclaim the sky is falling down.
Get your jabs, get your booster, make sure the NHS prioritises vaccinated people and if that means some unjabbed people die off, well that is their choice, just as smokers get lung cancer and alcoholics die of cirrhosis.
If you, my doom-mongering friend, want a real end of the world scenario, consider what happens if China goes into hard lockdown and industry gums up, the economy dies, and our shelves start to resemble a supermarket in Soviet times.
The collapse of global supply chains, hyperinflation, and the resultant political and economic turmoil that comes with it, is a far greater danger than the NHS becoming overwhelmed, or whatever it is the next strain you're worried about.
The danger is no longer a virus, the danger is what happens in a systemic collapse of the global economy and the likely political instability that goes with it. Because that is where locking down indefinitely, time after time, eventually gets you.
The answer is to accept that it is endemic, take your vaccine, get your boosters, get on with life. That is what most of us are doing.
This is all basically true. But when you seriously look in to it, it seems that there is no second division care for the unvaccinated option available, because of entrenched medical ethics. It won't work because doctors wont enforce it. Thats where this line of reasoning falls down.
The incredible sudden drop in Welsh Omicron cases, correctly cited by the ever-perceptive @Scott_xP, is no statistical glitch - it's happened because the brilliant Mark Drakeford reimposed one-way shopping in Wales as of -- checks notes -- two days ago.
We all know the virus is completely foiled by people walking around shops in a slightly slower and more confused way, so it is no wonder the pandemic has almost disappeared in Wales in 48 hours. "The Drake" may be many things - a world class statesman, a famed duellist, a recent Olympic ski jumper, and a cruelly and brutally effective womanizer - but he is no fool
Taking back control never felt so good but this is casus belli isn't it?
URGENT UPDATE FOR BRITISH RESIDENTS IN EU: Following a French Government decision, on 28/12/2021, unless they hold French residency, British citizens are now considered 3rd country citizens and can no longer transit France by road to reach their country of residence in the EU.
I have a sense Macron would still be doing this kind of nonsense even if we were still in the EU.....blaming the roast beef is Macron go to criticism.
There's a remarkable interview on Twitter (I might try and locate it when I'm not knackered from tax returning) where a French eurosceptic is interviewed by a French journalist about Franco-British relations. It's a serious interview, the pundit is not a lunatic
Basically, we are doomed to a Cold War with France for years if not decades. Why? Because the super-europhile French view Brexit as an Exocet aimed directly at the greatest project of post-war France - European Unification (under French leadership, begrudgingly shared with Berlin). The EU is all that France really cares about, foreign-policy-wise, as they see it as the only way to assert French power globally, now France is relatively so small, compared to the USA, China, and other rising powers like India
A "successful" Brexit is a mortal and perpetual peril to this ambition. If it is ever seen to happen it will encourage other more reluctant members of the EU tribe (Poland, Hungary, maybe Sweden and Denmark, even Greece and Italy) to copy the UK, thus members will topple away like dominoes and the EU will crumble.
Therefore Brexit cannot succeed, not only that it must be punished continuously, and Britain must be singled out for worse treatment than any other 3rd country, in perpetuity (because the French have no other idea how to handle Brexit, such it their hatred and fear of it)
Hence shit like this. Britain is deliberately being targetted by the Frogs, and this is going to go on for a long, long time, and we can expect no better from any other president - Macron is just more honest in his petulant anger than some
The UK needs to adjust to France as an overtly hostile power, for the long term. Once we accept this we can of course react, accordingly
Good job there's no sign of a successful Brexit then. Phew! Stand down.
It's just a speculation but at some point an issue will be tested. Astonishingly the EU has thus far, while acquiring a number of state like trappings has placed having a common currency, and common standards for fruit pies and My Little Pony stickers, ahead of having a common defence alliance.
One day, and it is getting nearer, an attack on a negligible piece of EU territory in some distant part of Lithuania or Finland of which we know nothing will occur and we will wake up to discover that the EU has a common line on the sugar content of fruit gums but no common line on what to do when attacked, nor the means to discover one. At that point Ireland will be worried about fruit gum regulation while it watches an attack on EU territory from the stands. The EU could not survive this.
If I have this right, they each still 30 years on use their own equipment, including radios, so the different counry's soldiers can't talk to each other. I would love to be proved wrong on this, but I think this is correct.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
Are the blocking British? Or just anyone who isn't EU/Schengen?
Travel from the UK to France
URGENT UPDATE FOR BRITISH RESIDENTS IN EU
Following a French Government decision, on 28/12/2021, unless they hold French residency, British citizens are now considered 3rd country citizens and can no longer transit France by road to reach their country of residence in the EU.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
Are the blocking British? Or just anyone who isn't EU/Schengen?
Brits will account for the large majority of non-EU travellers at this time of year, but most of the adjacent non-EU countries (Russia, Turkey, Serbia) are already in France’s red list. The interesting omission is the US, still relatively restriction free despite the explosion in cases. Logically, you’d expect this to change soon- although most countries think twice before upsetting the Americans, as we saw in the UK when our restrictions first came in.
You keep saying this, is there any chance of you elaborating? What scenario do you envisage for the UK, Europe, the world?
Genuine question. Just coming on here and saying "Oo-er" is not especially enlightening
And yes I know I do it all the time but at least I endeavour to entertain, mostly
I posted a lot earlier Leon.
I think with the large number of cases, mutations are likely which could evade vaccines and/or be more dangerous as we saw with delta.
The people in hospital is going one way: up.
I think we're in trouble. I still hope I am wrong but I am no longer unworried as I was a few days ago.
My hospital has installed a fixed multi-user holding ambulance to help unload. There were 25 ambulances on the forecourt tonight as I walked out. It looks pretty grim in terms of capacity.
Some mistake surely. The PB virology experts assure me tis just a cold. So what you describe can't be real...
Here it is:
Though most of those stuck in the ambulances unable to offload are with other conditions.
Thanks for the photo. Note to PB Virology experts - when you say "no threat to the NHS" and the NHS have the evidence of exactly what the threat is, ask yourselves who may be in the know...
There is a plan for temporary "Nightingale" wards in the car park too. Plans to staff them are a bit sketchy, but from Social Care apparently.
Good mitigations I think, but it is all getting a bit hairy.
@Foxy's evidence doesn't exist, betrays the narrative
Are we mixing up evidence and anecdotes again? They even say that most are non-Covid admissions.
Sure! Whoever said that the threat to the NHS was only inbound Covid cases? Its that there are too many Covid cases taking up beds so that they system can't cope. See the Tom Newton Dunn tweet linked earlier - Covid cases in hospital is increasing and its becoming a problem. And we're still only at pre-Christmas infections when it comes to cases in hospital.
The same people that said Delta was nothing to worry about, are those that are saying Omicron is nothing to worry about.
So is anyone who said Delta was nothing to worry about, going to stick their head up and say this is different
Who said Delta is nothing to worry about?
I don't recall you calling for a lockdown when Delta was around, we didn't need one was what you and several others said. I remember arguing with you about it
That's not the same thing, is it?
My point is you were wrong then and so I am interested in people that did call for a lockdown then who don't think there is anything to worry about now.
What I am hearing now is the same people that initially said "nothing to worry about" then said "lockdown isn't needed" then said "lockdown 2.0 isn't needed". It's the same people
You keep making these massive sweeping generalisations.
I have generally preferred not to make generalisations.
And with that, good night.
But the French elite are so paranoid about Brexit, so allergic to it and fearful of it, they set a low bar for its success. Britain surviving intact and not starving to death will probably seem quite successful to them. given their direful predictions of total British implosion.
Then the next time the EU does something widely unpopular, eurosceptics across the continent will start to look longingly at independent London.
This is the great French fear. By this guy's account it does stalk their nightmares.
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only.
By blocking British residents of Belgium or the Netherlands who want to use EuroTunnel and transit France?
By blocking French residents of France, too. Not to mention the Belgians etc.
Got a link for that? It’s not what EuroTunnel are saying:
Comments
I'm still on the cautious side. That is I'm saying it is too early to do a lap of honour, as a few were doing at least a week ago.
However. The case for doing owt is unproven thus far, other than get a jab asap.
I am more concerned about the framing tbh.
🇬🇧 A Whitehall style guide advises civil servants to avoid using the word “Brexit” and instead refer to “31 December 2020”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/12/29/avoid-using-word-brexit-whitehall-style-guide-advises-civil/
(*) I daresay candidates for other parties have done similar.
Whilst a version designed more for public reading is likely to give more emphasis to fluency in the English expression.
I had a friend who went to do Bible Translation in Ougadougou. Interesting conversations.
On NIV - yes a very good translation but that had a bit of a habit of following evangelical ideas, by comparison with say the Jerusalem Bible, which had a bit of an RC fingerprint.
Although I broadly agree with the rest of your piece, I don't think that is true at all. The reality is that if people don't leave their homes, who are they going to give Covid to?
Even the when vaccines first were released, nobody with any standing said that would be it, COVID would be eradicated from the face of the earth. In fact they said the opposite, COVID is here for a long time to come and there will be other variants. And you will all catch it at some point.
What they said was it would break the link between COVID and serious illness and death. All the evidence is this is still true, even with this new variant, especially if you had a booster.
If you aren't very old or have other significant vulnerabilities, COVID really is not a high risk to you. Boris said today 90% of people in ICU are not fully vaccinated. I am a little bit taken aback by that claim, but we know from other sources 70% of cases have for a long time been unvaccinated and hospitalisations are massively over represented by them, ~50% of admissions.
The two things that has found to be flawed from the initial assessment was it was hoped that the vaccines would really clamp down on transmission between two vaccinated people and there is a waning in protection (but that can be fixed with another shot).
These are unfortunate and less than ideal. But it isn't like the scientists are sitting on their hands doing jack shit. We will get better versions of the vaccine, and they are already working on a much more generalised one.
Sounds like omicron.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1476296473897754628
Even if they also do translations from Welsh into other languages, which they probably do, they surely had done English to Welsh translation before and would have an out of office in both languages as a practical consideration? I feel like there's another story of the people making the request not noticing the English out of office message at the same time perhaps.
“I’m here! I’m here!” cried Little Booster jab
But it was too late, young booster had failed to understand. The point was to criticise the Tories. Rachel wasn’t interested in poor Little Booster.
https://twitter.com/skepticalzebra/status/1476295628477157376?s=21
The first is "Dopesick" - an eight part Disney/Hulu miniseries about the rise of opioid abuse in the USA, punted by Big Pharma and the Sackler Family (who really are represented as comic book Jewish villains, almost to the point of anti-Semitism, and yet by all accounts the portrait is realistic). The narrative jumps around time wise, to an annoying extent, but the emotional power builds, as well. Compelling, and harrowing
The other is "The Great". A riotous, ribald, often fictional romp through the rise and rise of Catherine the Great of Russia. Expect lots of swearing, nudity, eye-gouging, scatological humour, mummified queens and death. It is of course full of made-up stories and dialogue, and yet from my reading of Russian history, it is also quite a faithful depiction of the lurid insanity of the Russian upper classes and their orgiastic drinking/fighting during the time of Peter the Great and his daughter-in-law Catherine. Brilliant fun.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1476296473897754628
https://twitter.com/williamnhutton/status/1476273893577003016
Even in a strict lockdown enough people leave the house that transmission doesn't end.
Any lockdown would have to be far, far stricter than anything we've attempted to halt transmission.
Furthermore, Sturgeon and Drakeford as saying the opposite, they are up and will go much much higher.....
There might be a case they aren't rising as fast as in England, but we don't know at the moment, but they certainly aren't going down.
What I'm trying to understand is - is the high level of protection from the third dose specifically, or having A dose more recently? Or in other words - are anti-vaxxers fucked regardless now because they would need the significant period of time to get all 3 doses in to "catch up", or is there still significant material benefit from getting a single jab in that would be worth an ad campaign in of itself?
Brexit31st December means.https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1476298001614348293
https://twitter.com/dudsinbxls/status/1476115805976899584
The French are trying to restrict travel to essential only. You can argue that this is pointless but, after two years of essentially dishonest policies both by the UK and many European countries - allowing travel for tourism but making so many rules and restrictions and expenses that only the rich and the determined will bother to actually make the effort, now saying “no tourist travel from the UK” is at least honest. And, as has already been observed, is hitting parts of the French economy significantly.
Personally, I don’t think many if any of the travel restrictions these past two years have made much sense or much difference.
Labour really must struggle with the idea of involving the SNP. If I was them I'd prefer to deal with the devil. (How is Mandelson?)
https://twitter.com/mrkenshabby/status/1476267249325461522?s=21
One day, and it is getting nearer, an attack on a negligible piece of EU territory in some distant part of Lithuania or Finland of which we know nothing will occur and we will wake up to discover that the EU has a common line on the sugar content of fruit gums but no common line on what to do when attacked, nor the means to discover one. At that point Ireland will be worried about fruit gum regulation while it watches an attack on EU territory from the stands. The EU could not survive this.
What a strange democracy ...
Then, you have all the people who can't WFH. Delivery drivers. Bin men. Nuclear power technicians. Meat packers at slaughterhouses. Plumbers (Imagine if your loo broke down during lockdown...).
Plus people still have to go out for other reasons. Cancer patients need treatment, people who've sat on their specs need new specs. Sick pet dogs need to go to the vets.
Then take all the people who simply won't comply. Whether that be fifty thousand anti vaxxers descending on Trafalgar square for a demo, or five thousand teenagers descending on a field in the Forest of Dean for a lockdown rave and some good old fashioned drug taking. Are you going to send in the police (or the tanks) to stop them? Then see point A, about western democracy, above.
And even if, even if you do through some miracle manage to get enough people locked in their houses either voluntarily or coercively, to get R under 1, all you are really doing is delaying those cases, because as soon as they're out again (or if you get to zero covid, until someone flies in on a private jet and doesn't quarantine) you're back to square one again in a month, because that's how fast this thing travels. Which means you've butchered your economy for however many months lockdown lasts, all to end up back to square one in a month. And you still have the problem of the unvaxxed.
So yes, you might be able to get R under 1 for a period of time, if you're willing to suspend pretty much everything that makes us a liberal democracy and accept the entire economy grinding to a halt as a result. Only to watch omicron cases jump up the second you loosen the rules.
But when most of us are double or triple jabbed, that would be the most extraordinary and pointless act of self harm.
So, possible to get R under 1 again? Maybe. Possibly. With draconian restrictions.
Worth it? Almost certainly not.
Though most of those stuck in the ambulances unable to offload are with other conditions.
"The Cabinet might not agree on what levelling up is but filling in potholes for a Conservative Peer is definitely not it. How many streets in Britain have had 330k to repair their roads? Ministers must come clean on how these shocking decisions are made."
https://twitter.com/lisanandy/status/1476175878170320901?s=20
I was just making a gag about how it's all due to Middle Class Remainer Skiiers.
So be it.
Obviously as I am not a flaming idiot I do not think that.
Just look at the lockdowns in Asia - people would literally not leave their apartments for six or seven weeks. If you did something like that, you could easily get the R below 1.
I'm not saying it's a good idea (it's not), but we could get R below 1 by implementing an incredibly strict lockdown that resulted in 95% of the population not leaving their homes.
IT IS HERE.
Week 51 "completed"* and the numbers are
Admissions: 8054 (-3.5%) Let's call it flat to avoid fiddly maths
Deaths: 590 (+43%)
Ventilated: 3.2%
Oxygenated: 14.7%
That makes their admissions graph look like this over the last few weeks
And Deaths look like
I'll start on the Week 52 projections figures tomorrow.
*Data lag means this number is still going to go up but I am comparing like-for-like week-on-week figures
3 out of five. I'm feeling generous tonight.
Did enjoy "Being the Ricardos" though. Nicole Kidman in line for an Oscar as Lucille Ball.
Don't want to pay the price? Why should others pay it for you?
England Men’s Head Coach Chris Silverwood will have to isolate for 10 days, along with his family, in Melbourne and will miss the fourth Ashes Test.
ECB say one family member has tested positive during latest round of PCR tests.
https://twitter.com/bbctms/status/1476301121350217738
There is a known long term shortage of personnel running the system and this shows during holidays as not enough people to do the testing or process the results. Potential collapse of the testing infrastructure in the coming weeks if infections increase.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU7VPAvN61Q
But apparently the UK testing system is utter shit...
The incredible sudden drop in Welsh Omicron cases, correctly cited by the ever-perceptive @Scott_xP, is no statistical glitch - it's happened because the brilliant Mark Drakeford reimposed one-way shopping in Wales as of -- checks notes -- two days ago.
We all know the virus is completely foiled by people walking around shops in a slightly slower and more confused way, so it is no wonder the pandemic has almost disappeared in Wales in 48 hours. "The Drake" may be many things - a world class statesman, a famed duellist, a recent Olympic ski jumper, and a cruelly and brutally effective womanizer - but he is no fool
The question that various Eastern European friends ask, is where the stopping point is? The Baltics? Poland?
But when you seriously look in to it, it seems that there is no second division care for the unvaccinated option available, because of entrenched medical ethics. It won't work because doctors wont enforce it. Thats where this line of reasoning falls down.
It is notable that in 3 days time the core of the Nato Rapid Reaction Force will become the Franco-German Brigade, under French leadership.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_190458.htm
If I have this right, they each still 30 years on use their own equipment, including radios, so the different counry's soldiers can't talk to each other. I would love to be proved wrong on this, but I think this is correct.
https://www.handelsblatt.com/english/politics/military-might-the-french-german-brigade-that-could-be-the-basis-of-an-eu-army/23581060.html?ticket=ST-8890329-Yt3uQFeIR3AwPzW5vr2H-cas01.example.org
I hope that the balloon does not go up in Ukraine.
URGENT UPDATE FOR BRITISH RESIDENTS IN EU
Following a French Government decision, on 28/12/2021, unless they hold French residency, British citizens are now considered 3rd country citizens and can no longer transit France by road to reach their country of residence in the EU.
https://www.eurotunnel.com/uk/travelling-with-us/latest/covid-19/#foca
Good mitigations I think, but it is all getting a bit hairy.
https://www.eurotunnel.com/uk/travelling-with-us/latest/covid-19/#foca