Interesting tidbit - aircraft passenger numbers took 2.5-3 years to recover after 9/11
My old squadronmate who is now a B744 captain for BA is ferrying them to Bournemouth for what he expects to be permanent storage/scrap for them and redundancy for him.
Sadly it looks like this crisis is leading to the end of the 744, at least as passenger transport. KLM flew their last 747 flight a couple of days ago.
When you think of those having a really shit time in these dark days, spare a thought for plane spotters.....
Organised religion might well win the 2020 Darwin Awards in a cramped field
Israel is struggling to contain a concentration of coronavirus infections among ultra-Orthodox Jews, with the impact reaching Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who went into isolation after an adviser from the community tested positive.
Mr. Netanyahu’s office said on Monday evening that his test for the virus, as well as those of his family and close staff, came out negative, though officials said he would remain in isolation as a precaution in keeping with ministry of health guidelines.
While the ultraorthodox make up about 10% of Israel’s population, ultraorthodox patients account for 50% of those hospitalized with the coronavirus disease, Covid-19, according to an analysis by Israel’s Channel 12.
Israel has 4,695 confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus as of Monday, with 16 deaths. Jerusalem, with a large ultraorthodox population, and the ultraorthodox city of Bnei Brak, have the highest infection rates in Israel, the Ministry of Health said.
Israeli officials attribute the high infection rates among the ultraorthodox to a failure to follow social distancing guidelines, including by holding large weddings and prayer gatherings. The Health Ministry last week listed synagogues as the locations with the highest rate of infections.
Mr. Netanyhau, in a televised address on Monday night, slammed what he said were certain groups that flouted health regulations, and ordered law enforcement to crack down on such behavior.
“The minority that it isn’t disciplined endangers itself and the majority,” he said.
Some in the insular ultraorthodox community said members weren’t defying public orders, but rather learning belatedly how much of a threat the virus poses.
Chaim Epstein, an ultraorthodox member of the Jerusalem City Council, said ultraorthodox rabbis, who shun most mainstream communication, weren’t listening to the radio or otherwise getting information about the dangers of the novel coronavirus. “They didn’t understand how bad the situation was,” he said.
Bnei Brak is near Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem. I've no doubt that the thrust of the article is broadly correct, but basic errors like that don't give me much confidence.
To be fair, if you are an American Tel Aviv is very near Jerusalem.
Oh sorry, I've misread the article. It's saying that Jerusalem and Bnei Brak have the highest rates, not that the latter is a cause of the former having high rates. Argh.
I was thinking that. Years ago, my old boss had her house burgled by a professional burgler. A neighbour spotted them and the police arrived just in time. They remarked that they had been chasing him (the burgler) for a very long time and he was a well known professional in the area.
No idea what he was put away for, probably six months.
But you're right. These few professional burglers aren't having a good time of it at the moment, with almost every house occupied at all times day and night!
Career switch required. Cars are sitting ducks. It's like Grand Theft Auto round my way atm.
But what do they do with them once they've nicked them? Who wants them at the moment?
I mean, maybe they are investing for the future, but a car isn't much use now if you're observing lockdown properly.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
There is a flip side... Opponents of the govt want Labour to be part of it! The GNU wet dream!
I am not convinced by the bcg story, but it is notable that the programme of routine vaccination in the UK ran from 1953-2005 in 10-14 year olds. In theory most long resident Brits born between 1940 and 1990 should have had it.
Several countries never used it, notably the Netherlands and USA.
I had the TB jab in school and I was born in 1992.
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
We need to be careful not to start defining the "Establishment" as including anybody who is successful in a white collar career and can use a knife and fork.
I am guessing there is no standard way to measure Covid-19 deaths and that each country does it differently. If so, aren't comparisons entirely meaningless?
Crude but effective: ignore entirely what anybody says anybody died of, just compare average vs actual death count for the time of year (accepting that this captures deaths indirectly due to CV owing to lack of medical treatment of other conditions and so on).
Several problems with this approach: As pointed out several times yesterday, it takes a couple of months to get the accurate total count of deaths. Comparing a partial count this year with a total count from last year is lying with statistics.
If something unrelated to the pandemic decreases the number of deaths in the second half of March and April, such as warmer weather) then that would totally obscure the effect of the pandemic disease.
If in the middle of June we find that there were no excess deaths in April this year, would that be due to isolation measures or due to the virus only killing of differnt people from those who would have died anyway?
As to your first paragraph, temporary problem and can only err in one direction. Second and third paragraphs valid but we can identify and correct for errors involved. The method is not perfect but it does rule out a whole heap of sources of error and opportunities for fraud. Or would you not be interested in seeing the relevant figures for Wuh an?
I would be interested in the figures. But I'm not interested in the current figures for March 23-29 2020 compared to March 25-31 2019. As I said making a direct comparison now would be a clear case of fraud.
I too am shocked to find that the UK (and elsewhere) figures for COVID deaths is only for COVID hospital deaths, but one advantage is they are available on a time scale on which the policy makers can act.
The most shocking thing for me is that if someone with leukaemia dies carrying Covid-19, it seems to be filed under ‘death by covid-19’. It could make a right mess of the cancer survival rates for 2020
I am not convinced by the bcg story, but it is notable that the programme of routine vaccination in the UK ran from 1953-2005 in 10-14 year olds. In theory most long resident Brits born between 1940 and 1990 should have had it.
Several countries never used it, notably the Netherlands and USA.
I had the TB jab in school and I was born in 1992.
Just made it! (Wiki) The UK introduced universal BCG immunization in 1953, and until July 2005, the UK policy was to immunize all school children between 10 and 14 years of age
I am guessing there is no standard way to measure Covid-19 deaths and that each country does it differently. If so, aren't comparisons entirely meaningless?
Crude but effective: ignore entirely what anybody says anybody died of, just compare average vs actual death count for the time of year (accepting that this captures deaths indirectly due to CV owing to lack of medical treatment of other conditions and so on).
Several problems with this approach: As pointed out several times yesterday, it takes a couple of months to get the accurate total count of deaths. Comparing a partial count this year with a total count from last year is lying with statistics.
If something unrelated to the pandemic decreases the number of deaths in the second half of March and April, such as warmer weather) then that would totally obscure the effect of the pandemic disease.
If in the middle of June we find that there were no excess deaths in April this year, would that be due to isolation measures or due to the virus only killing of differnt people from those who would have died anyway?
As to your first paragraph, temporary problem and can only err in one direction. Second and third paragraphs valid but we can identify and correct for errors involved. The method is not perfect but it does rule out a whole heap of sources of error and opportunities for fraud. Or would you not be interested in seeing the relevant figures for Wuh an?
I would be interested in the figures. But I'm not interested in the current figures for March 23-29 2020 compared to March 25-31 2019. As I said making a direct comparison now would be a clear case of fraud.
I too am shocked to find that the UK (and elsewhere) figures for COVID deaths is only for COVID hospital deaths, but one advantage is they are available on a time scale on which the policy makers can act.
Why would it be a fraud if it were stated that provisional figures were provisional? Especially as provisional figures can set a lower bound for the increase, death being what it is.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
I imagine things like car accident admissions to hospital have dropped dramatically.
Surely dog walkers taking their life in their hands driving a few miles down the road to walk their dog have had LOADS of accidents...the police said it was a HUGE RISK
I know that, after 9/11, there were some studies that looked at how cloudiness changed after the temporary cessation of flights. There is another opportunity to gather such data.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
Sounds like she did it with less help
How do you figure that out?
Edit: must be v frustrating for your dad and the whole family.
According to R4 More or Less, only 4% of shoppers are stockpiling pasta, yet this is sufficient to clear the shelves.
I wonder whether 1 in 25 are stockpiling cocaine.
Now must be a very trying time for anyone with an illegal drugs habit. It can't improve the mood in some locked-down houses.
A friend of mine who might well use cannabis received a hilarious text from her supplier explaining that they were now only supplying/delivering once a week, that they wished to avoid direct physical contact but would ring the bell and stay nearby to ensure that the product was safely collected, that their product bags were being wiped down and that they were doing all that could to avoid spreading the virus. Amazon would have been proud, Yodel would have been gobsmacked.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
You mean as happened in 2001 with the Foot and Mouth crisis?
Yes, absolutely. Starmer should be allowed full access to the government's scientists and data, and should have a seat at the COBR meetings to bring his view to the table where the key decisions are made.
I wouldn't have said the same about Corbyn though.
Public Health Wales has urged the country’s 440,000 smokers to quit now to reduce the risks from Covid-19 and said it has seen a spike in the number of people asking for help to stop.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I know that, after 9/11, there were some studies that looked at how cloudiness changed after the temporary cessation of flights. There is another opportunity to gather such data.
The video yesterday showing flight movements in Europe in March 19 and March 20 was eye opening. There are few upsides to this but the climate is certainly getting a breather.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
Sounds like she did it with less help
How do you figure that out?
Edit: must be v frustrating for your dad and the whole family.
Well I thought going to a grammar/private school would generally be considered more helpful than going to what I believe to be a non grammar/private school.
I’d like my kids to go to a grammar or private school rather than an academy or comp anyway
I'd be perfectly happy for either side to oppose on valid grounds. Such as, for example, cancelling exams without consulting OFQUAL and announcing substitutes for them in a press conference with no detail behind them (ten days on we are still waiting for actual instructions on that).
But carping for the sake of opposing is never a good look, whichever side is doing it. It's one of the things William Hague was criticised for over Northern Ireland, and also Michael Howard over detention of terrorist suspects.
Risk here, of course, is that validly opposing vs carping is in the eye of the beholder - in this case you. I think the Opposition should oppose exactly as they see fit in the circumstances. They should feel no pressure to go along with things they disagree with simply because there is a crisis on. They will know that the public will be turned off if their input comes over as petty and unhelpful and therefore they will take this into account.
Are the other 18 States fighting the pandemic through communal prayer?
In states like Alaska and Wyoming you probably don't need social distancing because people live so far apart from each other anyway. (A bit of an exaggeration but not much).
I wonder what our resident employment lawyers such as @DougSeal think of this approach. It doesn't seem within the band of reasonable responses to me but its not really my field.
I wonder what our resident employment lawyers such as @DougSeal think of this approach. It doesn't seem within the band of reasonable responses to me but its not really my field.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
I'd be perfectly happy for either side to oppose on valid grounds. Such as, for example, cancelling exams without consulting OFQUAL and announcing substitutes for them in a press conference with no detail behind them (ten days on we are still waiting for actual instructions on that).
But carping for the sake of opposing is never a good look, whichever side is doing it. It's one of the things William Hague was criticised for over Northern Ireland, and also Michael Howard over detention of terrorist suspects.
And it's also perfectly viable to challenge government policy without outright opposing it. (As Jeremy Hunt has demonstrated rather well.)
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
The second part of sentence 2 is undoubtedly correct, the first part remains to be seen. I suspect simple addition is not one of Jennie Formby's strong points.
The actual counting is being done independently, thankfully!
"The title of state epidemiologist or statsepidemiolog was probably little known to many people in Sweden before the coronavirus outbreak.
Now the holder of the title, Anders Tegnell, is one of the most-discussed people in the country. Tegnell gives daily updates on the situation in Sweden, reminding the public of official recommendations introduced to fight the outbreak, on behalf of the Public Health Agency (Folkhälsomyndigheten)."
In the eastern German city of Jena, shoppers and passengers on public transport will be required to wear a face mask. In the absence of a mask, people will be allowed to wear a scarf, as long as it covers the nose and mouth.
I think this is going to be commonplace law across Europe until a vaccine is found.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
Sounds like she did it with less help
How do you figure that out?
Edit: must be v frustrating for your dad and the whole family.
Well I thought going to a grammar/private school would generally be considered more helpful than going to what I believe to be a non grammar/private school.
I’d like my kids to go to a grammar or private school rather than an academy or comp anyway
Don't start me on that old chestnut. Many decades ago I went to a fantastic comprehensive, before moving to a different area and suffering two years in a hateful grammar school.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
In the eastern German city of Jena, shoppers and passengers on public transport will be required to wear a face mask. In the absence of a mask, people will be allowed to wear a scarf, as long as it covers the nose and mouth.
I think this is going to be commonplace law across Europe until a vaccine is found.
Works for me, gives me an excuse to wear my Toon scarf in time for the imminent Saudi takeover.
By hook or by crook we have arrived at the kind of government that it seems most people want: social democracy inside closed borders.
Social Democracy Inside Closed Borders? - I like it.
As a phrase, I mean, not as a concept. Not keen at all on the concept. Also not sure that that is the direction of travel, although I see where you get it from.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
Sounds like she did it with less help
How do you figure that out?
Edit: must be v frustrating for your dad and the whole family.
Well I thought going to a grammar/private school would generally be considered more helpful than going to what I believe to be a non grammar/private school.
I’d like my kids to go to a grammar or private school rather than an academy or comp anyway
Yes that can be true. It appears that Starmer took the 11-plus and LB either didn't or took it and failed. Everything seemed to flow from that. She then went to a co-ed, and Manchester Metropolitan Uni, he to Leeds Uni. He studied law, she didn't but did a conversion. They both then became lawyers.
So where does that leave them?
Pre-11yrs old = exactly the same background. Then, he had the opportunity at 11, took it and passed it; she we don't know. Then they both ended up as lawyers. Of the two paths, I would say that RLB worked harder to get to that point. But is Keir smarter? Case not proven (we can ask @DougSeal for the actual answer).
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
The second part of sentence 2 is undoubtedly correct, the first part remains to be seen. I suspect simple addition is not one of Jennie Formby's strong points.
The actual counting is being done independently, thankfully!
Of course. But they both went to law school and they both qualified to practise law.
We need to be careful not to start defining the "Establishment" as including anybody who is successful in a white collar career and can use a knife and fork.
Too late. It already means whatever people want, as seem with very posh professionals deemed not part of the establishment rather than a faction if it.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
Coordinated singing and/or cheering happens at football matches and race meetings. Is there evidence of mass infection following Premier League games or the Cheltenham Festival? If not, is it an indoor/outdoor thing?
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
In the eastern German city of Jena, shoppers and passengers on public transport will be required to wear a face mask. In the absence of a mask, people will be allowed to wear a scarf, as long as it covers the nose and mouth.
I think this is going to be commonplace law across Europe until a vaccine is found.
I was in Tesco's 2 days ago (heroic, I know) and I would estimate that about half of the customers had scarves over their faces. Its really caught on.
Interesting tidbit - aircraft passenger numbers took 2.5-3 years to recover after 9/11
My old squadronmate who is now a B744 captain for BA is ferrying them to Bournemouth for what he expects to be permanent storage/scrap for them and redundancy for him.
Sadly it looks like this crisis is leading to the end of the 744, at least as passenger transport. KLM flew their last 747 flight a couple of days ago.
When you think of those having a really shit time in these dark days, spare a thought for plane spotters.....
Sounds like Bournemouth's plane spotters are going to see a few new tail numbers this week.
There's a photo around somewhere of 50 Emirates A380s all parked up at DWC airport in the sandpit.
Our 81 year old neighbour has taken to shouting her grocery order through our letterbox. I then go to buy everything and leave it in her garage. She seems to be getting through more drink than a Royal Marines Close Combat Troop.
"The title of state epidemiologist or statsepidemiolog was probably little known to many people in Sweden before the coronavirus outbreak.
Now the holder of the title, Anders Tegnell, is one of the most-discussed people in the country. Tegnell gives daily updates on the situation in Sweden, reminding the public of official recommendations introduced to fight the outbreak, on behalf of the Public Health Agency (Folkhälsomyndigheten)."
Well hands up anyone who knew who our CSO was before this. Now he's a media star. I really like his style, its measured, careful, clearly open to change reflecting the evidence and clear. We are lucky to have him.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
Coordinated singing and/or cheering happens at football matches and race meetings. Is there evidence of mass infection following Premier League games or the Cheltenham Festival? If not, is it an indoor/outdoor thing?
ETA: and what of the Houses of Parliament?
Wasn’t the Atalanta/Valencia match seen as a factor in spreading the virus in those countries? As for parliament, all that hot air and glad-handing must make it relatively dangerous.
I am not convinced by the bcg story, but it is notable that the programme of routine vaccination in the UK ran from 1953-2005 in 10-14 year olds. In theory most long resident Brits born between 1940 and 1990 should have had it.
Several countries never used it, notably the Netherlands and USA.
I had the TB jab in school and I was born in 1992.
Were you in S Essex? I had some involvement there; we thought stopping was a damn fool idea and continued as long as we could.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
You mean as happened in 2001 with the Foot and Mouth crisis?
Yes, absolutely. Starmer should be allowed full access to the government's scientists and data, and should have a seat at the COBR meetings to bring his view to the table where the key decisions are made.
I wouldn't have said the same about Corbyn though.
You rather defeat your arguement with your final sentence though.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
The schools are critical - the discipline at the Free School (which some middle class parents complain of) is designed to prevent the gangs getting in there. They have a fair number of some quite... interesting pupils.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
Coordinated singing and/or cheering happens at football matches and race meetings. Is there evidence of mass infection following Premier League games or the Cheltenham Festival? If not, is it an indoor/outdoor thing?
ETA: and what of the Houses of Parliament?
Wasn’t the Atalanta/Valencia match seen as a factor in spreading the virus in those countries? As for parliament, all that hot air and glad-handing must make it relatively dangerous.
The football caused an early hotspot with at least 11 cases identified quite early including the match commentator I believe. I would think the plane and pre match bars were more responsible than the game itself given fan segregation.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
I witnessed a brilliant shutdown - someone was ranting at a lady who'd sent her boy to West London Free School. Some garbage about betraying her class.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
The schools are critical - the discipline at the Free School (which some middle class parents complain of) is designed to prevent the gangs getting in there. They have a fair number of some quite... interesting pupils.
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
Coordinated singing and/or cheering happens at football matches and race meetings. Is there evidence of mass infection following Premier League games or the Cheltenham Festival? If not, is it an indoor/outdoor thing?
ETA: and what of the Houses of Parliament?
Wasn’t the Atalanta/Valencia match seen as a factor in spreading the virus in those countries? As for parliament, all that hot air and glad-handing must make it relatively dangerous.
The football caused an early hotspot with at least 11 cases identified quite early including the match commentator I believe. I would think the plane and pre match bars were more responsible than the game itself given fan segregation.
Still wondering if there was a post-Cheltenham spike in numbers.
I am not convinced by the bcg story, but it is notable that the programme of routine vaccination in the UK ran from 1953-2005 in 10-14 year olds. In theory most long resident Brits born between 1940 and 1990 should have had it.
Several countries never used it, notably the Netherlands and USA.
I had the TB jab in school and I was born in 1992.
Were you in S Essex? I had some involvement there; we thought stopping was a damn fool idea and continued as long as we could.
West Midlands It was the most painful jab I’ve ever had.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
I think in fairness that Labour pushed hard on the gig worker/low paid issues and that they were right to do so. I remember Matt Hancock acknowledging in the Commons that something he was doing was an idea from Jon Ashworth for which he was grateful.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
You mean as happened in 2001 with the Foot and Mouth crisis?
Yes, absolutely. Starmer should be allowed full access to the government's scientists and data, and should have a seat at the COBR meetings to bring his view to the table where the key decisions are made.
I wouldn't have said the same about Corbyn though.
I don't recall much of the Foot & Mouth crisis, I must confess. But why on earth would you not want Jeremy on board for the national effort on this one? Are you worried that he would leak confidential plans to the virus?
“I’m planning on being there this Tuesday March 10, and hoping many of you will be, too,” he wrote.
Sixty singers showed up. A greeter offered hand sanitizer at the door, and members refrained from the usual hugs and handshakes.
“It seemed like a normal rehearsal, except that choirs are huggy places,” Burdick recalled. “We were making music and trying to keep a certain distance between each other.”
After 2½ hours, the singers parted ways at 9 p.m.
Nearly three weeks later, 45 have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or ill with the symptoms, at least three have been hospitalized, and two are dead.
The outbreak has stunned county health officials, who have concluded that the virus was almost certainly transmitted through the air from one or more people without symptoms.
“That’s all we can think of right now,” said Polly Dubbel, a county communicable disease and environmental health manager.
In interviews with the Los Angeles Times, eight people who were at the rehearsal said that nobody there was coughing or sneezing or appeared ill...
Lots of people in a confined space, opening their mouths much of the time, seems a perfect way of spreading this. Maybe we should be looking at the nature of activities as well, in deciding what is safer. Quiet activities with no physical contact will surely be safer than people yabbering away and being more physical.
Coordinated singing and/or cheering happens at football matches and race meetings. Is there evidence of mass infection following Premier League games or the Cheltenham Festival? If not, is it an indoor/outdoor thing?
ETA: and what of the Houses of Parliament?
Wasn’t the Atalanta/Valencia match seen as a factor in spreading the virus in those countries? As for parliament, all that hot air and glad-handing must make it relatively dangerous.
The football caused an early hotspot with at least 11 cases identified quite early including the match commentator I believe. I would think the plane and pre match bars were more responsible than the game itself given fan segregation.
Still wondering if there was a post-Cheltenham spike in numbers.
How would you tell given they came from all over? The evolution in Liverpool is interesting with cases doubling in three days. Still below 200
You mean as happened in 2001 with the Foot and Mouth crisis?
Yes, absolutely. Starmer should be allowed full access to the government's scientists and data, and should have a seat at the COBR meetings to bring his view to the table where the key decisions are made.
I wouldn't have said the same about Corbyn though.
I don't recall much of the Foot & Mouth crisis, I must confess. But why on earth would you not want Jeremy on board for the national effort on this one? Are you worried that he would leak confidential plans to the virus?
Re Corbyn and the discussion on the previous thread about whether he was the worst Labour leader ever (but also relevant to this one).
He is the worst not because of his electoral failures or the votes he lost - though these are very good reasons for criticising him - but because under his leadership the Labour Party became morally degraded. That is his legacy and it is infinitely worse than that of other losing Labour leaders because it goes to the heart of the sort of party Labour claims to be.
And Starmer - if he wins - will have this as his most important party task, clearing out Labour’s Augean stables.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
I think in fairness that Labour pushed hard on the gig worker/low paid issues and that they were right to do so. I remember Matt Hancock acknowledging in the Commons that something he was doing was an idea from Jon Ashworth for which he was grateful.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
If they haven't got the capacity they should have rectified that quickly weeks ago.
Are the WHO whinging on and on for the sake of it or is it as they say the single most important action.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
I think in fairness that Labour pushed hard on the gig worker/low paid issues and that they were right to do so. I remember Matt Hancock acknowledging in the Commons that something he was doing was an idea from Jon Ashworth for which he was grateful.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
If they haven't got the capacity they should have rectified that quickly weeks ago.
Are the WHO whinging on and on for the sake of it or is it as they say the single most important action.
Spain : Cases up aroung 6500 today from yesterday. Deaths a record 849. ICU 5600.
Still very difficult. I think the growth in new cases may be levelling off.
These are really quite different figures from the Worldometer which has 473 deaths. Maybe they are not complete yet. It can be a bit misleading when they post partial results.
My Dad just finished chemo in Feb, and his biopsy, meant to be last week, has been postponed because of the Coronavirus situation. Slightly unnerving
That is very unfortunate. Hope he gets a slot soon. And yes, I meant that sort of thing but also something more subtle. Imagine you notice the onset of something mild but worrying because it is a potential red flag cancer symptom. People are different, of course, but I bet many of them in such a position right now (and for the next few weeks and months) will be less inclined to go and get it checked out. And since early diagnosis is key with cancer this will lead to a number of premature deaths in future years.
Re Corbyn and the discussion on the previous thread about whether he was the worst Labour leader ever (but also relevant to this one).
He is the worst not because of his electoral failures or the votes he lost - though these are very good reasons for criticising him - but because under his leadership the Labour Party became morally degraded. That is his legacy and it is infinitely worse than that of other losing Labour leaders because it goes to the heart of the sort of party Labour claims to be.
And Starmer - if he wins - will have this as his most important party task, clearing out Labour’s Augean stables.
Arguably, however, even as an electoral force he was Labour's worst leader. Henderson may have lost more seats in 1931, but at least he had a valid excuse - a literal split in the party, the Depression, Snowden's changes to welfare that so outraged Labour supporters, the collapse in funding, and a united opposition that seemed out to get Labour back.
Meanwhile, Corbyn faced a government that had just expelled several Cabinet ministers, after a decade of austerity and political paralysis, led by a man whose own backbenchers openly described as a charlatan and a liar.
And he still lost 60 seats. That's equal to the decline that Foot suffered (60) facing a united party led by a wartime prime minister when Foot was being outflanked to his right by the SDP.
Individual groups of clinicians provided accurate data from studies within their hospitals describing the symptoms, CFR, the hospitalisations %, the severe-mild mix, etc. This data was published in the Lancet, NEJM and JAMA early doors and I read it contemporaneously. The results have been borne out by what we have seen in Western Europe and the US. So the evidence provided by individual groups of Chinese on the relative impact was true.
What was undoubtedly not true, in my view, was the scale of the problem in China. The 3000 deaths is nonsensical.
So it's a bit like completing a picture in great detail in one corner (the hospital publications) whilst leaving the rest of the picture blank (the macro statistics managed by the Chinese state). I imagine that was a calculated decision the Chinese took to release information which was easily verifiable, whilst not telling the truth on a macro scale on information which is much harder to verify, without being there.
Parents getting a bit frustrated with the total lack of deliveries. They've had one click-and-collect shop since the lockdown started, but given those entail visiting the supermarket I've managed to dissuade them from another since. But it might become necessary (there is a local shop but the stocks run fairly low and it's not the biggest).
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
I think in fairness that Labour pushed hard on the gig worker/low paid issues and that they were right to do so. I remember Matt Hancock acknowledging in the Commons that something he was doing was an idea from Jon Ashworth for which he was grateful.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
If they haven't got the capacity they should have rectified that quickly weeks ago.
Are the WHO whinging on and on for the sake of it or is it as they say the single most important action.
How do you magic up PCR machines?
Did Johnson realise he didnt have a magic PCR tree when he promised to ramp up to 25k?
Germany managed it S Korea managed it why cant we?
I wonder what our resident employment lawyers such as @DougSeal think of this approach. It doesn't seem within the band of reasonable responses to me but its not really my field.
A little used subsection of the Acas Code permits this I understand
Individual groups of clinicians provided accurate data from studies within their hospitals describing the symptoms, CFR, the hospitalisations %, the severe-mild mix, etc. This data was published in the Lancet, NEJM and JAMA early doors and I read it contemporaneously. The results have been borne out by what we have seen in Western Europe and the US. So the evidence provided by individual groups of Chinese on the relative impact was true.
What was undoubtedly not true, in my view, was the scale of the problem in China. The 3000 deaths is nonsensical.
So it's a bit like completing a picture in great detail in one corner (the hospital publications) whilst leaving the rest of the picture blank (the macro statistics managed by the Chinese state). I imagine that was a calculated decision the Chinese took to release information which was easily verifiable, whilst not telling the truth on a macro scale on information which is much harder to verify, without being there.
Also, it enables them to say they warned the world of this.
The problem is that it is clear that basically every Western government and their advisers looked at the absolute scale and said 90,000 infected and 3,000 dead after 3 months unrestricted spread we can cope with something on that scale if we dampen this down a bit (and probably a load of western "exceptionalism" i.e. better healthcare, less pollution, lower smoking rates).
As horse races go this one has indeed been pretty dull and of course the cancellation of the latter debates didn’t really help. RLB has been so poor that you honestly wonder whether she should even be in the shadow cabinet. And then there’s Jeremy. What on earth do you do with him?
Labour should get some sort of a bounce from the new leader but he has a tricky hand to play.
If I were Starmer I would be wanting the Corbyn left to be shouting from the rooftops about betrayal each and every day. It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing. It will also ensure that internally more and more members turn away from them.
"It will be the quickest way to demsointrate that things are changing."
Labour elect a posh white bloke who has been to Oxbridge and call it change.
I look forward to the self righteous lectures on "diversity"
I don't think Starmer went to Oxbridge, but that is by the by. Everything Starmer has achieved he has achieved through hard work and talent. He is basically a turbo-charged you.
He comes from the same clique that gave us Boris, Cameron and Blair.
It's not actually change, it's simply more establishment.
So you will be cheering from the rafters when Long Bailey gets the nod on Saturday? And not because she is not an election losing disaster, but because she is a genuinely working-class Manchester Solicitor.
Long-Bailey's background is no different to Starmer's. He got further because he is smarter.
Well he also had the opportunity to go to a grammar school, which RLB might not have, and the fortune for it to be turned into a private school while he was there.
To be fair to both Bailey and Starmer, they have achieved success through their own endeavours. I much prefer that to having life handed to one on a silver plate.
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
Though didn't "The Rise of the Meritocracy" consider it to be a bad thing? Particularly by lacking care and attention on society's more vulnerable?
Parents getting a bit frustrated with the total lack of deliveries. They've had one click-and-collect shop since the lockdown started, but given those entail visiting the supermarket I've managed to dissuade them from another since. But it might become necessary (there is a local shop but the stocks run fairly low and it's not the biggest).
Some taxi firms around here are now running collect and deliver services for click and collect. It's not quite zero contact but is much closer than a trip to the local supermarket.
The most sensible thing he can do is offer to assist and support the government in any way he can through the crisis (and the government would be silly to resist, should invite him to the key COBR meetings etc.), which buys him a few months to sort out as best he can the internal party problems caused by the Corbynites.
People seem very keen that during this crisis the LABOUR opposition ceases to oppose the TORY government.
I wonder if this sentiment would apply to the same extent if the parties were reversed?
Yes. Oppositions dont automatically oppose anything that comes from government, it picks and chooses what to oppose, when and how eg labour did not oppose Cameron on gay marriage. By and large I think the opposition has been reasonable right now, since scrutiny should not cease. I'd also say if Corbyn showed symptoms then he should get priority for a test like the PM.
I think in fairness that Labour pushed hard on the gig worker/low paid issues and that they were right to do so. I remember Matt Hancock acknowledging in the Commons that something he was doing was an idea from Jon Ashworth for which he was grateful.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
If they haven't got the capacity they should have rectified that quickly weeks ago.
Are the WHO whinging on and on for the sake of it or is it as they say the single most important action.
How do you magic up PCR machines?
Did Johnson realise he didnt have a magic PCR tree when he promised to ramp up to 25k?
Germany managed it S Korea managed it why cant we?
They had a lot more PCR machines to start with.
Also, I don't know, but I presume PCR machines are like ventilators, only a few companies in the world make them. Are we going to be shocked if we find Germany is a massive producer of them, given high tech manufacturing is a core part of their economy.
Germany testing is exceptionally high compared to rest of Europe. If this was easy, every European country would be running 100,000s of tests a day. They aren't, which suggests, shortage of crucial parts in the supply chain.
Also, the UK have been very wary of getting caught out like Spain, with dodgy tests. Hence, why these anti-body tests are taking so long to validate.
Should the UK be doing better, absolutely. I believe one thing they have been slow to do is demand that universities process these, which would add capacity. But it is clear, that because the whole world is fighting over the machinery and base chemicals, like they are ventilators, it isn't trivial to ramp up anti-gen tests.
Individual groups of clinicians provided accurate data from studies within their hospitals describing the symptoms, CFR, the hospitalisations %, the severe-mild mix, etc. This data was published in the Lancet, NEJM and JAMA early doors and I read it contemporaneously. The results have been borne out by what we have seen in Western Europe and the US. So the evidence provided by individual groups of Chinese on the relative impact was true.
What was undoubtedly not true, in my view, was the scale of the problem in China. The 3000 deaths is nonsensical.
So it's a bit like completing a picture in great detail in one corner (the hospital publications) whilst leaving the rest of the picture blank (the macro statistics managed by the Chinese state). I imagine that was a calculated decision the Chinese took to release information which was easily verifiable, whilst not telling the truth on a macro scale on information which is much harder to verify, without being there.
I agree. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the anecdotal accounts from my Singapore colleagues about the improving situation there but the statistics produced by the CCP cannot be seen as credible anymore.
Spain : Cases up aroung 6500 today from yesterday. Deaths a record 849. ICU 5600.
Still very difficult. I think the growth in new cases may be levelling off.
These are really quite different figures from the Worldometer which has 473 deaths. Maybe they are not complete yet. It can be a bit misleading when they post partial results.
Worldometer now updated. But different sites do seem to show data differently.I used RTVE for Spain as it gives Province detail.
Our first confirmed CV death was 5 March, so not sure if it tells us anything interesting.
What do you make of the Diamond Princess study?
I think it is a study of how coronavirus progresses with proper first world first class medical interventions in a health system working well within its design limits. What I fear is not CV itself but CV in an entirely overwhelmed health system. Given the age profile of DP patients it is possible that a large majority of them would have been triaged out of any sort of care except palliative under rules being explicitly applied in London and Italy, giving rather different outcomes. In short, I think it is irrelevant.
Comments
I mean, maybe they are investing for the future, but a car isn't much use now if you're observing lockdown properly.
Hopefully the daily death tolls continue to decline and such medical treatments can resume.
https://twitter.com/nick_w_estes/status/1244795542695116800
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/11/plan-to-expand-bristol-airport-rejected-after-climate-protests
Yesterday there was one flight tracked departing from Bristol Airport, down from around one hundred.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airports/brs/statistics
I know that, after 9/11, there were some studies that looked at how cloudiness changed after the temporary cessation of flights. There is another opportunity to gather such data.
Edit: must be v frustrating for your dad and the whole family.
Yes, absolutely. Starmer should be allowed full access to the government's scientists and data, and should have a seat at the COBR meetings to bring his view to the table where the key decisions are made.
I wouldn't have said the same about Corbyn though.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52103066
Michael Young, may forever be vilified for spawning Toby, but one of his other creations, the notion of 'meritocracy' I like very much.
Still very difficult. I think the growth in new cases may be levelling off.
I’d like my kids to go to a grammar or private school rather than an academy or comp anyway
Also, just scrapping the cats and batteries probably makes it worth it for a scrote.
(As Jeremy Hunt has demonstrated rather well.)
Now the holder of the title, Anders Tegnell, is one of the most-discussed people in the country. Tegnell gives daily updates on the situation in Sweden, reminding the public of official recommendations introduced to fight the outbreak, on behalf of the Public Health Agency (Folkhälsomyndigheten)."
https://www.thelocal.se/20200330/whos-actually-in-charge-of-swedens-coronavirus-strategy
I think this is going to be commonplace law across Europe until a vaccine is found.
As a phrase, I mean, not as a concept. Not keen at all on the concept. Also not sure that that is the direction of travel, although I see where you get it from.
"I did it to increase his chances of good GCSEs and to reduce his chances of being stabbed"
She had been living in one of the vibrant bits of London, moved to a tiny flat, specifically to get her boy out.
So where does that leave them?
Pre-11yrs old = exactly the same background. Then, he had the opportunity at 11, took it and passed it; she we don't know. Then they both ended up as lawyers. Of the two paths, I would say that RLB worked harder to get to that point. But is Keir smarter? Case not proven (we can ask @DougSeal for the actual answer).
ETA: and what of the Houses of Parliament?
https://thesun.co.uk/news/10300635/teenage-boy-dies-west-london/
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2020/03/damian-green-coronavirus-huawei-and-what-to-do-about-china-in-the-long-term.html
There's a photo around somewhere of 50 Emirates A380s all parked up at DWC airport in the sandpit.
I think that indicates the job of the opposition. To be independent thinkers, to look for consequences that the government might not have thought of, to make sure that the most vulnerable are not being overlooked. An example yesterday was Emily Thornberry pressing the case of Brits stuck overseas and being ripped off by airlines taking ridiculous amounts of money for flights then cancelling them and issuing vouchers. She was right to do so (even if some of those so stuck really should never have left in the first place).
Whinging on and on about the level of testing, not so much. Its clear that if the government had the capacity to do more testing they would be doing it.
He is the worst not because of his electoral failures or the votes he lost - though these are very good reasons for criticising him - but because under his leadership the Labour Party became morally degraded. That is his legacy and it is infinitely worse than that of other losing Labour leaders because it goes to the heart of the sort of party Labour claims to be.
And Starmer - if he wins - will have this as his most important party task, clearing out Labour’s Augean stables.
Are the WHO whinging on and on for the sake of it or is it as they say the single most important action.
0-14 : 0
15-44: 0.04
45-64: 0.40
65-74: 3.39
75-84: 8.92
85-00: 31.09
Meanwhile, Corbyn faced a government that had just expelled several Cabinet ministers, after a decade of austerity and political paralysis, led by a man whose own backbenchers openly described as a charlatan and a liar.
And he still lost 60 seats. That's equal to the decline that Foot suffered (60) facing a united party led by a wartime prime minister when Foot was being outflanked to his right by the SDP.
It was a shockingly bad performance.
Individual groups of clinicians provided accurate data from studies within their hospitals describing the symptoms, CFR, the hospitalisations %, the severe-mild mix, etc. This data was published in the Lancet, NEJM and JAMA early doors and I read it contemporaneously. The results have been borne out by what we have seen in Western Europe and the US. So the evidence provided by individual groups of Chinese on the relative impact was true.
What was undoubtedly not true, in my view, was the scale of the problem in China. The 3000 deaths is nonsensical.
So it's a bit like completing a picture in great detail in one corner (the hospital publications) whilst leaving the rest of the picture blank (the macro statistics managed by the Chinese state). I imagine that was a calculated decision the Chinese took to release information which was easily verifiable, whilst not telling the truth on a macro scale on information which is much harder to verify, without being there.
Germany managed it S Korea managed it why cant we?
The problem is that it is clear that basically every Western government and their advisers looked at the absolute scale and said 90,000 infected and 3,000 dead after 3 months unrestricted spread we can cope with something on that scale if we dampen this down a bit (and probably a load of western "exceptionalism" i.e. better healthcare, less pollution, lower smoking rates).
Also, I don't know, but I presume PCR machines are like ventilators, only a few companies in the world make them. Are we going to be shocked if we find Germany is a massive producer of them, given high tech manufacturing is a core part of their economy.
Germany testing is exceptionally high compared to rest of Europe. If this was easy, every European country would be running 100,000s of tests a day. They aren't, which suggests, shortage of crucial parts in the supply chain.
Also, the UK have been very wary of getting caught out like Spain, with dodgy tests. Hence, why these anti-body tests are taking so long to validate.
Should the UK be doing better, absolutely. I believe one thing they have been slow to do is demand that universities process these, which would add capacity. But it is clear, that because the whole world is fighting over the machinery and base chemicals, like they are ventilators, it isn't trivial to ramp up anti-gen tests.
Thanks for the confirmation Mr U