Howdy, Stranger!

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

Introducing the LAB-LD “pact” that doesn’t exist and won’t – politicalbetting.com

1246

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    He's a reasonably highly rated artist of that genre. His exhibition was in a major gallery off San Marco. As far as your plea of mitigation goes that's about all I can give you!

    Oh and he's done a fine 'Leda and the Swan'
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    Sincere question: is that true? Could that image get you into trouble? It’s clearly a cartoon not a real person (however alarming)

    It’s mad if you could go to jail for merely looking at a cartoon. The artist might need therapy, however
    No, sorry I am wrong (hold the front page!)

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/extreme-pornography

    It is a requirement that "A reasonable person looking at the image would think that the persons or animals were real."
    My god. A sensible law! On that refreshing note I’m off to the gym
    There was a recent case in the US, where the prosecution successfully argued that cartoons of a sexual nature depicting people who were clearly underage, should be in the same category as photographs of actual children being actually abused. No, I’m not sure I understand that one either.
    I might be wrong, but I believe the argument is similar to the 'violent games causing violent crimes' one. People watching cartoons showing extreme sexual content are more likely to perform extreme sexual acts because they become inured to it. It becomes normal.

    I don't consume such stuff, but I don't agree with that central idea.
    I believe that’s the argument, yes. I’m not about to go searching for the story though. I agree strongly with harsh sentences for images of children being abused, but am well aware that there are degrees of such things. I disagree with the idea that possession of a drawing can be worthy of imprisonment.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Roger said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    He's a reasonably highly rated artist of that genre. His exhibition was in a major gallery off San Marco. As far as your plea of mitigation goes that's about all I can give you!

    Oh and he's done a fine 'Leda and the Swan'
    Snow White taking multiple pictures of her ‘lady garden’ is interesting. Wonder what the inspiration was.

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/selfica-30767
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    V v low turn out. Erdington by election in winter.

    I suppose they could hold off until May council elections? I believe Brum has them this season.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:


    There is an interesting counterfactual on how many would have died without vaccines and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Imperial originally modelled ca 500 000 deaths in the UK alone without interventions. (Considerably more than the death toll for all of WW2 for comparison) That feels about right to me.

    Vaccines have been the success story of this pandemic.

    They have, unfortunately a small set of idiots have decided not to get them and a large number of politicians have decided that vaccines aren't enough so have pushed for unnecessary lockdowns.
    We had the option in March 2020 of doing nothing and letting the virus go through the population. As @FF43 states, the death toll would have been considerable and the economic, social and psychological upheaval of those weeks of death and chaos would have been horrible albeit more would have acquired immunity through infection.

    We didn't do that and in all fairness the rigorous restrictions of spring and early summer 2020 did achieve the aim of suppressing the virus considerably - the numbers of cases and deaths were, by July and without a single vaccination, negligible.

    Arguably whether through mass infection or mass restriction, the virus was and would have been suppressed.

    Yet it never went away and came back as we socially re-integrated in the autumn of 2020. The virus got a head start on the vaccine and that forced us back into restrictions in the autumn and early winter of 2020.

    We were able to fight back successfully from December 2020 with vaccines which have doubtless saved hundreds of thousands of lives but without any vaccine, Delta would have unleashed another wave of anguish though it's possible to imagine it's in the nature of viruses for successive variants to be increasingly less severe given the immunity built up by previous infections so in a world without vaccines Omicron would still be a mild variant.

    Fortunately, human ingenuity has prevailed and it's to be hoped the knowledge we have gained in fighting this virus can spill into other areas of medical research and offer real hope to those suffering so many other chronic conditions.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited January 2022
    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    Insulate Britain activist on release from prison:

    "He now says his experience at HMP Thameside has encouraged him to 'take any future action regardless of if prison is a consequence.'

    McKechnie added: 'If we're able to save these 8,000 to 30,000 every year that are lost to fuel poverty then I would spend the rest of my life in prison for that.' "

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,523
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    Sincere question: is that true? Could that image get you into trouble? It’s clearly a cartoon not a real person (however alarming)

    It’s mad if you could go to jail for merely looking at a cartoon. The artist might need therapy, however
    No, sorry I am wrong (hold the front page!)

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/extreme-pornography

    It is a requirement that "A reasonable person looking at the image would think that the persons or animals were real."
    My god. A sensible law! On that refreshing note I’m off to the gym
    There was a recent case in the US, where the prosecution successfully argued that cartoons of a sexual nature depicting people who were clearly underage, should be in the same category as photographs of actual children being actually abused. No, I’m not sure I understand that one either.
    I might be wrong, but I believe the argument is similar to the 'violent games causing violent crimes' one. People watching cartoons showing extreme sexual content are more likely to perform extreme sexual acts because they become inured to it. It becomes normal.

    I don't consume such stuff, but I don't agree with that central idea.
    I believe that’s the argument, yes. I’m not about to go searching for the story though. I agree strongly with harsh sentences for images of children being abused, but am well aware that there are degrees of such things. I disagree with the idea that possession of a drawing can be worthy of imprisonment.
    IMV it's more complex nowadays though. Someone might draw something truly obscene from their own imagination (euugh). However, nowadays it is easy enough to convert real images into cartoons. Should cartoons taken from real images, or real images that have been cartoonified, illegal? Possibly/probably, yes.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    You just don’t have a very inquiring mind. It’s not your nature. This is not a political point let alone an insult. Some of my friends (of various political persuasions) are exactly the same. They’ve got a set of opinions they formed quite young, they’re not particularly interested in anything that challenges them. They don’t want to know. Better things to do.

    They’re far from stupid, but they’re narrow in thinking. Settled. The kind of person you might want as an accountant. But definitely not the sort of person you’d want as a journalist

    Conversely, you really wouldn’t want me as your accountant. I’d get overexcited on Day 3 and tell you to invest everything in Doge just before it crashes, making you bankrupt

    The world needs all types
    I am a bit lazy, that's true. I'm curious, incredibly so, but too rarely can I be arsed to satisfy it. So I have to rely on my instincts. They're spookily good, luckily, but I would benefit from more elbow and less grease. My PB posts probably would too. Let's see if I can move somewhat in that direction. Starting tomorrow.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    edited January 2022
    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?
    That is the comfortable Labour hold. As well as the speculation. Which I've just done.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    Taz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.
    Some parts of the seat have been trending Conservative recently.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    edited January 2022
    Evening all :)

    Just updating the latest French Presidential poll:

    Macron: 25%
    Le Pen: 17% (+1)
    Pécresse: 17%
    Zemmour: 12% (-1)
    Melanchon: 9%
    Jadot: 7%

    I don't know if this will be one of the big political betting events of the year but it's certainly fascinating to see who will join Macron in the second round of the election.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    alex_ said:

    tlg86 said:

    Not sure if this will work for everyone, but check out London News:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live/bbcone

    Go to 18:34

    Javid was confronted by a doctor who doesn't want to be vaccinated. Normally politicians come off looking bad in such circumstances, but on this occasion, I think it looks good for Javid.

    I’ve mentioned before that opponents of NHS vaccine mandates (because of impact on staff shortages) are on dangerous ground when they come from the same groups also so (justifiably) despairing at the number of unvaxxed Covid victims they have to deal with.
    It easily tips into hypocrisy. I've previously pointed out how the chair of the BMA was enthusiastically trumpeting the case for more rules for the general population a couple of months back, whilst making excuses for his anti-vaxxer colleagues. Forcing everyone to go around in masks whenever they leave the house being, apparently, a reasonable and indeed essential mitigation against the dreaded virus, whereas compulsory vaccination (i.e. a scratch on the arm once every few months) for healthcare workers is somehow an unacceptable violation of the individual's right to choose.

    Some of these doctors are, alas, not so very different from politicians holding illicit lockdown parties. One rule for them and their mates, another for the rest of us plebs.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,410

    Insulate Britain activist on release from prison:

    "He now says his experience at HMP Thameside has encouraged him to 'take any future action regardless of if prison is a consequence.'

    McKechnie added: 'If we're able to save these 8,000 to 30,000 every year that are lost to fuel poverty then I would spend the rest of my life in prison for that.' "

    Recent anecdote from the Scottish prison system.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/01/your-man-in-saughton-jail-part-1/
  • boulayboulay Posts: 3,773

    John Currin is a painter who tippy toes the line between erotic and pornographic (subjective measures I know); nsfw or in front of your gran I would advise. His prices are in the millions which of course makes him completely legit.

    https://tinyurl.com/2p92rbsf

    Tom of Finland was the same. I remember hours of amusement in my juvenile 17 year old mind when I bought a book of his postcards on a trip to London then my friends and I started sending them to girls we knew at the local girls’ boarding school - not to upset them as they found the paintings highly amusing - but the thought of their house-mistress’ face when sorting the post must have been wonderful.
  • Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    Sincere question: is that true? Could that image get you into trouble? It’s clearly a cartoon not a real person (however alarming)

    It’s mad if you could go to jail for merely looking at a cartoon. The artist might need therapy, however
    No, sorry I am wrong (hold the front page!)

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/extreme-pornography

    It is a requirement that "A reasonable person looking at the image would think that the persons or animals were real."
    A cartoon of Rupert Bear violating an old lady was central to the Oz trial in 1971.
    I remember Rupert but not that part. I was at school at the time and one of my schoolmates had a copy of that Oz issue.
    It was the schoolkids angle that did for them. In a moment of madness I joined a demo after the verdict which Felix Dennis addressed. He'd been given a short back and sides in prison which seemed particularly shocking. John and Yoko were there too. The only demo JL ever attended, apparently.
    Schoolkids as in the drawings or schoolkids as guest editors? Don't remember the former.
    As guest editors. And it was emblazoned the 'Schoolkids Issue', so it was regarded as deliberate corruption of minors. Much of the illustration (not Rupert Bear) was influenced by Aubrey Beardsley so it didn't overstep the line for an adult readership in the 1970s. But for children? Definitely not.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    To which he'll respond with a pompous speech about safety, which will see Welsh Labour's numbers tick up another couple of percentage points.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Andy_JS said:

    Taz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.
    Some parts of the seat have been trending Conservative recently.
    Yes. This is 70% Leave territory. And the Midlands is where the Tories are still going forward.
    I'd have a Labour hold as favourite. But I don't think it's a slam dunk. Candidates will be vital.
    Don't the Tories have a Birmingham resident with very recent by election experience?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,184
    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

    That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

    The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

    Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.

    Really?

    I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
    And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
    If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
    Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?
    That is the comfortable Labour hold. As well as the speculation. Which I've just done.

    So much will depend on the mood music and candidate selection.

    There is for me an obvious candidate for the Conservatives.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    Sincere question: is that true? Could that image get you into trouble? It’s clearly a cartoon not a real person (however alarming)

    It’s mad if you could go to jail for merely looking at a cartoon. The artist might need therapy, however
    No, sorry I am wrong (hold the front page!)

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/extreme-pornography

    It is a requirement that "A reasonable person looking at the image would think that the persons or animals were real."
    A cartoon of Rupert Bear violating an old lady was central to the Oz trial in 1971.
    I remember Rupert but not that part. I was at school at the time and one of my schoolmates had a copy of that Oz issue.
    It was the schoolkids angle that did for them. In a moment of madness I joined a demo after the verdict which Felix Dennis addressed. He'd been given a short back and sides in prison which seemed particularly shocking. John and Yoko were there too. The only demo JL ever attended, apparently.
    Schoolkids as in the drawings or schoolkids as guest editors? Don't remember the former.
    As guest editors. And it was emblazoned the 'Schoolkids Issue', so it was regarded as deliberate corruption of minors. Much of the illustration (not Rupert Bear) was influenced by Aubrey Beardsley so it didn't overstep the line for an adult readership in the 1970s. But for children? Definitely not.
    Thanks, that's interesting. I don't remember it particularly corrupting me or my comrades. But then I'm here today.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?
    That is the comfortable Labour hold. As well as the speculation. Which I've just done.

    So much will depend on the mood music and candidate selection.

    There is for me an obvious candidate for the Conservatives.
    and completely screw up his career - can't win what should be a safe seat, can't win in his own town...
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489

    Data suggests around 98% of UK now have some level of immunity (both natural and vaccinated) - meaning that even if infected again- will have milder disease. This is hopefully why hospitalisations have not so far risen as fast as feared.

    https://twitter.com/timspector/status/1479514782336229376?s=20

    That's a really good and reassuring graph :) if I remember correctly, at the binging of December an equivalate number was that 95% so the totally unprotected has more than halved in a month.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Andy_JS said:

    Taz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.
    Some parts of the seat have been trending Conservative recently.
    But a by election, at the height of the govts unpopulairty, and some rock solid labour parts in the seat should see labour increase its percentage majority
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    A political compass from Edwardian England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland.

    https://www.gotoquiz.com/results/political_compass_edwardian_edition
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Quite. Devolution has a strange effect on the unionists. They think that London is always right. Here's a famous example, from the Scotsman no less: https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/letters/diary-2508490

    'Lord Foulkes was in full flow, as ever, berating the evils of having a country run by two people whose names sound like fish. "The SNP are on a dangerous tack at the moment," he said. "What they are doing is trying to build up a situation in Scotland where the services are manifestly better than south of the Border in a number of areas."

    A clearly bemused MacKay responded with the obvious question: "Is this such a bad thing?"

    "No," replied George Lord, "but they are doing it deliberately."'

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited January 2022
    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Yes, it’s 36 days away.

    But there’s a lot of planning that has to be done between now and then, and the WRU need to make the decision on where they play the match in probably the next fortnight.

    Which stadia are available on the date in question? Do they have a suitable pitch for rugby? Can they get permission from stadium owner and local authorities? Can they accommodate TV requirements, sponsor hoardings, hospitality etc? How many tickets can they sell, and how will they allocate them?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    Also. Is it really that important?
    USA, Canada, Germany have had devolved COVID responses.
    Not sure why it is so viscerally vital the UK has to have a single approach.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    What are we doing about second jabs for the 12-15 year olds?

    As I understand it between September and the end of term, teams of people visited all the schools to jab kids in those age groups, but only with one jab.

    Would seem sensible to me to send the teams back to the schools to A) give second jabs, and B) give the parents who seed no the first time a second chance.

    AIUI we are the only place in the would where kids in that age group have only had one jab.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    eek said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?
    That is the comfortable Labour hold. As well as the speculation. Which I've just done.

    So much will depend on the mood music and candidate selection.

    There is for me an obvious candidate for the Conservatives.
    and completely screw up his career - can't win what should be a safe seat, can't win in his own town...
    Politics, as we've seen so often, is a gamble.

    You take a chance, back the right horse and your career and prospects are secured but, as you say, get it wrong and it all ends in tears.

    The problem with playing it safe is either someone else benefits or the frustration that opportunities such as this don't come along that often.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    Not Anglophobic: just feeling they can do it better, and/or more suited to their own areas. It's a common mistake to confuse racism with not wanting to toe the London line.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Wales have played their home 6N games in England before. They famously won the competition by beating England at Wembley.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Taz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

    Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

    Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.
    Comfortable Labour hold I think
    Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.
    Some parts of the seat have been trending Conservative recently.
    Yes. This is 70% Leave territory. And the Midlands is where the Tories are still going forward.
    I'd have a Labour hold as favourite. But I don't think it's a slam dunk. Candidates will be vital.
    Don't the Tories have a Birmingham resident with very recent by election experience?
    According to Wikipedia the conservative candidate for each of the last 4 General Elections has been the same chap. at a guess he will what to stand again.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Erdington_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    Taz said:

    Roger said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher



    I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

    I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.
    It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

    My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar
    Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.
    Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

    It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates
    I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078
    Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?
    He's a reasonably highly rated artist of that genre. His exhibition was in a major gallery off San Marco. As far as your plea of mitigation goes that's about all I can give you!

    Oh and he's done a fine 'Leda and the Swan'
    Snow White taking multiple pictures of her ‘lady garden’ is interesting. Wonder what the inspiration was.

    https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/selfica-30767
    On-line consultation with a gynaecologist.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    edited January 2022

    Data suggests around 98% of UK now have some level of immunity (both natural and vaccinated) - meaning that even if infected again- will have milder disease. This is hopefully why hospitalisations have not so far risen as fast as feared.

    https://twitter.com/timspector/status/1479514782336229376?s=20

    Yet iSage wants to keep imposing fairly severe restrictions because of the 2%.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    I’ve read it written that the key was the U.K. not using the Civil Contingencies Act (which had considerable parliamentary safeguards) in favour of modifying existing public health acts and new legislation. Had they used the former the devolved admin would have had little ability to deviate legislatively.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    Owen on Tony Blair -
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/labour-tony-blair-prime-minister-grassroots

    He keeps me honest, Jones does. If ever I drift towards 'centrism' his columns slap me in the chops.

    People may not like Blair personally but repudiating him would be mad for Labour as it would reek of Corbyn-era far leftery. For myself, I disagreed violently with Blair on Iraq to the point of some light civil disobedience but I can't find it in my heart to hate someone who did a lot of good in power and is the only Labour leader to win an election in my fucking lifetime.
    I'm maybe a bit more mixed on him. The article makes some strong points of criticism imo but otoh May 97 was a joy - still remember it as if it were yesterday! - and it was a good government (ex the obvious things), furthermore he's the only Labour leader to win at the polls in MY adult lifetime and I'm old, which is quite a thought and not a nice one. Also, I agree with you (and not with Jones) about the current direction. I think Starmer's tack to the centre (just tone for now since policy unknown) is astute and is probably going to work.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    edited January 2022
    BigRich said:


    According to Wikipedia the conservative candidate for each of the last 4 General Elections has been the same chap. at a guess he will what to stand again.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Erdington_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

    Yes, also a councillor in the constituency so ticks a lot of the boxes.

    But it's a risk as this isn't a good time to be standing as a Conservative.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    dixiedean said:

    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    Also. Is it really that important?
    USA, Canada, Germany have had devolved COVID responses.
    Not sure why it is so viscerally vital the UK has to have a single approach.
    It isn't, though OTOH nor is the UK exactly alone in seeing spats between the centre and the component parts over Covid policy.
    Carnyx said:

    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    Not Anglophobic: just feeling they can do it better, and/or more suited to their own areas. It's a common mistake to confuse racism with not wanting to toe the London line.
    True.

    OTOH, It'd be interesting to know how often the SNP administration, Welsh Labour or the English Tories have conceded that something was done better elsewhere than it was under their own aegis.

    One of the advantages of devolution was, we were told, that the component parts of the UK could act as a laboratory, in which various things were done differently and best practice in one nation could inform better policy in the others. Does this happen? Ever?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    alex_ said:

    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    I’ve read it written that the key was the U.K. not using the Civil Contingencies Act (which had considerable parliamentary safeguards) in favour of modifying existing public health acts and new legislation. Had they used the former the devolved admin would have had little ability to deviate legislatively.
    It’s to the government’s credit they didn’t go down the route of using the CCA, and having survived a pandemic without needing to use it, there is a good argument that that Act should now be amended to severely reduce it’s scope.
  • dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Always check on who is doing the warning.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    edited January 2022
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    You just don’t have a very inquiring mind. It’s not your nature. This is not a political point let alone an insult. Some of my friends (of various political persuasions) are exactly the same. They’ve got a set of opinions they formed quite young, they’re not particularly interested in anything that challenges them. They don’t want to know. Better things to do.

    They’re far from stupid, but they’re narrow in thinking. Settled. The kind of person you might want as an accountant. But definitely not the sort of person you’d want as a journalist

    Conversely, you really wouldn’t want me as your accountant. I’d get overexcited on Day 3 and tell you to invest everything in Doge just before it crashes, making you bankrupt

    The world needs all types
    I am a bit lazy, that's true. I'm curious, incredibly so, but too rarely can I be arsed to satisfy it. So I have to rely on my instincts. They're spookily good, luckily, but I would benefit from more elbow and less grease. My PB posts probably would too. Let's see if I can move somewhat in that direction. Starting tomorrow.
    To be fair, you often make astute, forensic political judgements, divorced from any emotion. I imagine you were excellent at your job

    My mentality is very different - as I say - and largely formed by my fear of boredom. And it is a real haunting fear. Hence my life of risk and foolishness. So I seek out interesting or sensational stories (you might have noticed). I’m then pretty good - I think - at seeing them with an open mind, and speedily assessing implications. Gaming them

    But calm measured judgement, devoid of emotion, like you? Nope. Can’t do them. Useless. I’ve learned from painful experience, for instance, that I’m crap at financial investment. I either get bored or over-excited. So now I’m just tediously cautious. Blue chip stocks etc

    As you’ve noted, this is probably one reason I have tolerated Boris longer than most. 1 he’s a bit like me. 2. He doesn’t bore me
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

    That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

    The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

    Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.
    Really?

    I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
    And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
    If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
    Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.
    Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

    But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    edited January 2022

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Always check on who is doing the warning.


    Yes. Linked to this the other day. Chronicle report on NYE.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/new-year-newcastle-clean-up-22620202.amp

    It was an article of faith that Newcastle would be heaving.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    Erdington was 63% Leave, compared to 59% in North Shropshire.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Sandpit said:

    alex_ said:

    Applicant said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.
    The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.
    How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

    Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.
    I’ve read it written that the key was the U.K. not using the Civil Contingencies Act (which had considerable parliamentary safeguards) in favour of modifying existing public health acts and new legislation. Had they used the former the devolved admin would have had little ability to deviate legislatively.
    It’s to the government’s credit they didn’t go down the route of using the CCA, and having survived a pandemic without needing to use it, there is a good argument that that Act should now be amended to severely reduce it’s scope.
    Not so much if the purpose of not using it was to avert the parliamentary scrutiny/safeguards that were built into it. I mean they effectively seemed to have realised that they could introduce equivalent legislation at short notice, without the same safeguards, and be able to do pretty much whatever they wanted.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Andy_JS said:

    Erdington was 63% Leave, compared to 59% in North Shropshire.

    Was it? I read 71. But now I'm not sure where I got that from...as I said earlier, don't think this is nailed on at all.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    The only person I have seen worrying about boosters waning was CHB. Endlessly failing to understand the complexity of the immune response.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    According to reports, protection from severe disease is 70% after three months following the second dose, but 90% after three months following the third. If these data are correct then the boosters clearly have value, as the Government and its advisers have been seeking to emphasise.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    Yes, there is evidence that first boosters help. It seems like the third dose gives really good t-cell immunity as well as big hit of nAbs.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,461
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    The Tories didn't go hard in NS or OB+S? I find that difficult to believe.
    And if they didn't, then why the heck not?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    No. But a lot of people don't get it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    Why would the Tories go hard in a seat they have never held and where Labour got over 50% of the vote even in 2019?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    They'll doubtless be hoping, both for this reason and for that of the sheer expense of the exercise, that coronavirus boosters become like flu jabs and are only needed once a year, free to the vulnerable and available for a modest charge to anybody else who feels that they'd benefit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Popularity of senior Tory and Labour politicians compared to name recognition

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1479534972092436485?s=20
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    It doesn't seem necessary yet and we don't want to hit exhaustion too quickly. There's now a window to take stock, see how we can bring third doses up to 90% and then look at future variant buster vaccines for 35-45m people starting in October and done by December 17th.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    We have no idea how much resistance there is to the flu jab, because it’s entirely voluntary. No pressure. Those who want it, get it

    The VAX is very different. New, strange, controversial and becoming mandatory across the world. And there are hints we might need 2 or 3 every year forever?
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

    It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    The only person I have seen worrying about boosters waning was CHB. Endlessly failing to understand the complexity of the immune response.
    There was no convincing him that modelled immunity based on nAb levels wasn't a good predictor of actual immunity. As we've now found out in the UK.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Just updating the latest French Presidential poll:

    Macron: 25%
    Le Pen: 17% (+1)
    Pécresse: 17%
    Zemmour: 12% (-1)
    Melanchon: 9%
    Jadot: 7%

    I don't know if this will be one of the big political betting events of the year but it's certainly fascinating to see who will join Macron in the second round of the election.

    If that Zemmour to Le Pen swing continues it will be Le Pen and Macron will be re elected by a solid margin.

    If it does not and Pecresse takes second place, the runoff will be neck and neck
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    Why would the Tories go hard in a seat they have never held and where Labour got over 50% of the vote even in 2019?
    Correction, the Conservatives did hold Birmingham Erdington from 1931 to 1945 but on different boundaries and it has been Labour ever since
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    TimT said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

    It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.
    I’m absolutely pro-vax. Stick that pin in me baby. But I know where my friend is coming from

    If told, “you will need two new jabs every year, until you keel over” I’d feel a bit queasy. What exactly are they pumping into me? Probably irrational, but if I feel that way, others will. Like my friend (who has an anti-vax wife which drives him nuts, ironically)
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    MaxPB said:

    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    The only person I have seen worrying about boosters waning was CHB. Endlessly failing to understand the complexity of the immune response.
    There was no convincing him that modelled immunity based on nAb levels wasn't a good predictor of actual immunity. As we've now found out in the UK.
    I suspect he doesn’t know enough about the subject to understand. But then what would pb be without people pontificating on shit that they know nothing about?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    pigeon said:

    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    According to reports, protection from severe disease is 70% after three months following the second dose, but 90% after three months following the third. If these data are correct then the boosters clearly have value, as the Government and its advisers have been seeking to emphasise.
    Ok - I thought maybe it was protection from symptomatic illness, rather than severe disease. Although it anyway gets very confusing what these stats actually mean. Sometimes supposed big percentage variation can actually in reality be a big difference within a very small number.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,184
    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

    That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

    The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

    Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.
    Really?

    I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
    And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
    If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
    Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.
    Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

    But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.
    Normally, blokes claim its head AND heart. Take HYUFD, for example. In his heart, he's Conservative. And in his head he's Conservative.

    But I don't fully believe you. You're a clever and thoughtful and most importantly self-aware individual, as this discussion shows. So I don't believe you'd simply do what the politicians you like best told you to. I think what you've done is set out one of those 'this sentence is a lie' paradoxes which by stating you disprove. Or something.


  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    We have no idea how much resistance there is to the flu jab, because it’s entirely voluntary. No pressure. Those who want it, get it

    The VAX is very different. New, strange, controversial and becoming mandatory across the world. And there are hints we might need 2 or 3 every year forever?
    Or some vulnerable people may need one a year for the next three or four years, before Covid eventually turns into just another common cold virus?

    As I understand it (and as seems to be borne out by the characteristics of Omicron) there really is a trade-off between virulence and transmissibility with this nasty. The mechanism by which it evolves to become more transmissible (which is what the virus is under pressure to become, of course) is the same mechanism by which it becomes less harmful. Thus, eventually, it will give everyone a snotty nose every couple of years but do serious harm to practically nobody.

    People who are especially vulnerable to Covid, and those of us who care about and for them, are not going to be free of this threat for some time to come, but I take heart from the prospect that we probably shall be in the end.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    edited January 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    Why would the Tories go hard in a seat they have never held and where Labour got over 50% of the vote even in 2019?
    Correction, the Conservatives did hold Birmingham Erdington from 1931 to 1945 but on different boundaries and it has been Labour ever since
    The 1983 boundary changes notionally put it in the Conservative column by about 1,500 votes, but Birmingham was one of the cities that (in part) swung to Labour that year [along with Liverpool and Glasgow] and they won it by about 200.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,184
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

    He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

    He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

    How this plays out for him I really do not know
    Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

    1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
    2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
    3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

    If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.
    All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.
    Hang on.
    We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
    Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
    Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
    Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?
    Always check on who is doing the warning.


    Yes. Linked to this the other day. Chronicle report on NYE.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/new-year-newcastle-clean-up-22620202.amp

    It was an article of faith that Newcastle would be heaving.
    Both can be true.
    The question is, were lots of Scots heading to Newcastle for a night out on NYE2019? Not inconceivable that they were. It used to be what I did, in my 20s: pick a new place to see in the new year each year. And then in 2020 nothing happened; so when we get a lot of people travelling on NYE2021 it seems like a lot. But actually isn't particularly unusual.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088

    MaxPB said:

    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)
    The only person I have seen worrying about boosters waning was CHB. Endlessly failing to understand the complexity of the immune response.
    There was no convincing him that modelled immunity based on nAb levels wasn't a good predictor of actual immunity. As we've now found out in the UK.
    I suspect he doesn’t know enough about the subject to understand. But then what would pb be without people pontificating on shit that they know nothing about?
    We are all, to a greater or lesser degree, muddling through on almost every topic we ever discuss. And the experts don't even get it right all the time, so I think we're perfectly entitled to be wrong sometimes, too.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,748
    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    The tories are swimming against the tide. There is disillusionment with Boris now, more so than in 2019, which will suppress their vote; and Labour don't have the Corbyn factor. Based on this, I would expect Labour to increase their majority.

    Sad about Jack Dromey dying, not sure of the circumstances but it is a young age to die. RIP
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    TimT said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

    It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.
    How regular is the question. Data doesn't really exist for booster efficacy over time vs Omicron yet.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,785
    darkage said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    The tories are swimming against the tide. There is disillusionment with Boris now, more so than in 2019, which will suppress their vote; and Labour don't have the Corbyn factor. Based on this, I would expect Labour to increase their majority.

    Sad about Jack Dromey dying, not sure of the circumstances but it is a young age to die. RIP
    RIP, Jack Dromey.

    Would have been a tight by-election a year ago. Less so now, I think.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    edited January 2022
    An interesting article that has recently appeared on the Spectator front page.

    "What the Capitol riots and the plot to stop Brexit have in common" (£)
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-the-capitol-riots-and-the-plot-to-stop-brexit-have-in-common
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    I'm triple jabbed and every jab has put me to bed for a day or two with tiredness and flu-like symptoms, with each jab being worse than the last (Pfizer, Pfizer, Moderna half dose in that order).

    I'll still follow medical advice, but if it's two or three jabs a year for the rest of my life, that's six days a year I'll be off sick from work. And that's just from the medicine.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited January 2022
    "The science isn't strong enough".

    Watch the moment an unvaccinated hospital consultant challenges Health Secretary Sajid Javid over the government's policy of compulsory COVID jabs for NHS staff.

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1479532922952732672?s=20

    Rather worried about this consultants lack of knowledge of the science....if he sticks with this stance, I think he will be finding the only place willing to employ him will be in the developing world.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,461
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    We have no idea how much resistance there is to the flu jab, because it’s entirely voluntary. No pressure. Those who want it, get it

    The VAX is very different. New, strange, controversial and becoming mandatory across the world. And there are hints we might need 2 or 3 every year forever?
    It's 80 - 90% take up with no pressure so people don't seem resistant.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited January 2022
    The flu jab stat is surprising and encouraging. It isn't like they went with COVID + Flu at the same time.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

    That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

    The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

    Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.
    Really?

    I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
    And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
    If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
    Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.
    Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

    But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.
    Normally, blokes claim its head AND heart. Take HYUFD, for example. In his heart, he's Conservative. And in his head he's Conservative.

    But I don't fully believe you. You're a clever and thoughtful and most importantly self-aware individual, as this discussion shows. So I don't believe you'd simply do what the politicians you like best told you to. I think what you've done is set out one of those 'this sentence is a lie' paradoxes which by stating you disprove. Or something.
    What I mean is on stuff above my paygrade - most things - I take great account of my assessment of the quality of those offering opinions.

    Eg my dad in the original Ref voted 'In' to the Common Market mainly because the likes of Jenkins and Heath were for and the likes of Powell and Benn were against.

    Like father like son on this if on little else.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    Leon said:

    TimT said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

    It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.
    I’m absolutely pro-vax. Stick that pin in me baby. But I know where my friend is coming from

    If told, “you will need two new jabs every year, until you keel over” I’d feel a bit queasy. What exactly are they pumping into me? Probably irrational, but if I feel that way, others will. Like my friend (who has an anti-vax wife which drives him nuts, ironically)
    I am generally against taking medications wherever possible, and am particularly resistant to medicines that are for anything other than addressing an acute issue. No long term drug regimes for me (f&ck statins). But I am totally relaxed about 2+ vaccinations a year if that is going to fend off nasty infectious diseases.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Andy_JS said:

    An interesting article that has recently appeared on the Spectator front page.

    "What the Capitol riots and the plot to stop Brexit have in common" (£)
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-the-capitol-riots-and-the-plot-to-stop-brexit-have-in-common

    What laughable bollocks that is.
    The Capitol riots - an attempted coup.
    The 2017 parliament - the democratically elected government

    What is it about Brexit that makes some people think that it uniquely has to bind the hands of future parliaments? Even now there is no legal reason at all why the 2024 parliament couldn't overthow Brexit and rejoin.
    Because THERWILLOFTHERPEOPLE is why

    Not an argument I get behind, I hasten to add, but that's the theory
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    True, and yet anecdotally I think Leon is right. My brother won't get the third jab as he seems to regard the necessity of having it as an indication there's been zero progress and we're right where we were a year ago.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    glw said:

    Leon said:

    His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

    He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

    Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

    Which is even more reason to investigate it

    Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

    https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

    Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.
    Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

    They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

    Quintessential gaslighting

    I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

    Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

    A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc
    The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

    However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

    So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

    Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

    Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.
    The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

    That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.
    Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

    The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

    Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.
    Really?

    I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
    And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
    If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
    Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.
    Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

    But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.
    Gerry Adams' endorsement of Remain was that crucial to you? 🙂
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    Why would the Tories go hard in a seat they have never held and where Labour got over 50% of the vote even in 2019?
    Because I don't think given Boris' position he can afford to accept this is another loss, especially in a seat that is so Leave. I'm not saying the Tories will win, I am saying I think they will put up more of an effort than some recent by-elections. And it is not that far to travel to Birmingham from London, probably easier to get to than going to Old Bexley.

  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,395
    HYUFD said:

    Popularity of senior Tory and Labour politicians compared to name recognition

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1479534972092436485?s=20

    On the Tory side, a bit surprised at how very unpopular Cameron/Osborne are compared to Boris, whose ratings are surprisingly strong and better than May's. Wonder when the polling was done?

    On the other hand, so far as Labour concerned Sir Keir well behind Brown and Balls. Andy Burnham easily the most popular contemporary Labour figure.

  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    dixiedean said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

    Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

    My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.
    The Tories didn't go hard in NS or OB+S? I find that difficult to believe.
    And if they didn't, then why the heck not?
    I'll copy and paste the answer I gave to HYFUD so apologies:

    Because I don't think given Boris' position he can afford to accept this is another loss, especially in a seat that is so Leave. I'm not saying the Tories will win, I am saying I think they will put up more of an effort than some recent by-elections. And it is not that far to travel to Birmingham from London, probably easier to get to than going to Old Bexley.

  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,785
    Leon said:

    TimT said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    pigeon said:

    News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

    Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

    So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.
    A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

    People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account
    There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.
    That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

    It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.
    I’m absolutely pro-vax. Stick that pin in me baby. But I know where my friend is coming from

    If told, “you will need two new jabs every year, until you keel over” I’d feel a bit queasy. What exactly are they pumping into me? Probably irrational, but if I feel that way, others will. Like my friend (who has an anti-vax wife which drives him nuts, ironically)
    Omicron is milder, if not yet mild, and the evolutionary run of play isn't going to reverse the upper respiratory, fast breeder reasons why Omicron is mild. Multiple vaccinations, having it a few times, immunity will ultimately render this a common cold for sure. We'll see what COVID is doing to people in a year or two but, yes, I've already mused on here as to when I want to find the vaccination off ramp and nothing has changed.

    I'm not getting repeated lifelong vaccination for a common cold, that's for sure.
This discussion has been closed.