Naz Shah has been appointed shadow minister for "community cohesion". This is the woman who said grooming victims should stay quiet for the sake of community cohesion. It is astonishingly insulting for victims that Starmer did this.
That is definitely a mis-step. Even leaving her past history aside, she has shocking judgement.
A dog whistle to the far left, perhaps?
I don't think Naz Shah is a dogwhistle to the Corbynistas - that would be Zara Sultana or a few others.
AFAIK, Shah is the only one who has convincingly tackled her own casual antisemitism head on; the others mainly seem just to issue "notpologies".
What has she done that was so head on?
There should have been zero tolerance of anyone involved in antisemitism. At least as far as promotions are concerned. To promote someone who has been antisemitic sends entirely the wrong message.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
Video shows a South Yorkshire officer scolding a family for letting their young children play on the front lawn Cambridge Police boasted that officers had visited a local Tesco this morning to snoop on non-essential aisles
They ought to be at the airports making sure people coming into the country are not at risk of spreading the virus.
The words "drop" and "ocean" spring immediately to mind.
A lot of this is about security theatre to encourage people to adopt the right behaviour. Arguably if there were visible checks at airports, it would give people more of a sense that their own efforts are not in vain, even if there's no rational case for it.
"From the result of their blood survey, the German team estimated the death rate in the municipality at 0.37% overall, a figure significantly lower than what’s shown on a dashboard maintained by Johns Hopkins, where the death rate in Germany among reported cases is 2%.
The authors explain that the difference in the calculations boils down to how many people are actually infected but haven’t been counted because they have mild or no symptoms."
Half a per cent, more or less, is very much in line with other evidence, including that from China outside Hubei province.
Of course, if the zany conspiracy theorists are right it's far deadlier than that. But something like 0.5% seems to be the consensus.
Which implies about 200 000 deaths in the UK to get to herd immunity and the ability to leave lockdown without controls.
For comparison about twice that number of casualties were taken over the five years of the WW II
Your number for WWII seems rather low. UK and Crown Colonies deaths were around 450k. But your point is valid - we are facing a world-changing war level of fatalities.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
I would have thought the pathetic word-police babies would have moved on by now. Clearly not.
Yes but which team has he taken one for?
Team Fucking Awesome!
Pathetic I’m afraid. Which team do you regard in such way, he doesn’t play for Liverpool.
Err, the conservative party? The clue is in his handle.
You don't know that for certain. With a name like BluestBlue he could regard Everton as Team Fucking Awes . . . sorry I can't even finish that sentence. 😂
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
They should have formed one in the first place instead of hijacking the Labour Party.
I think it was based on a certain naivety. They thought that pendulums swing in British politics, so if they controlled one of the two major parties sooner or later they were bound to be in government.
It didn’t occur to them that if people thought they were unfit for government all that would happen is the pendulum wouldn’t swing.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
New moths for the year last night included Waved Umber, Lunar Marbled Brown and Brimstone Moth.
That is stunning. Do they get released?
Absolutely. Calling it a moth "trap" is a misnomer - really should be called a "lure". Just photo and them and release. (Unless it is something that needs to be collected for some scientific study. There are some species that just cannot be determined to species by observation. But that is quite rare.)
Well that didn't take long...twitter trending with BorisTheButcher again....demanding he be held responsible for every death.
From the same people demanding the lockdown ends NOW?
The people demanding an end to lockdown now seem to be almost exclusively the more Neanderthal Leavers, who seem to see Covid-19 as a plot to delay Brexit, or at the very least to reduce the value of their investments.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the deserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
If you were managing a ward in the NHS, and the Prime Minister came in sick with an illness that can kill unhealthy people, and older people, you'd be thinking that you don't want something to go wrong. If something goes wrong, there's questions asked about you in Parliament, you'll be in the papers, it's a total shitshow. Everyone will be wondering why he wasn't kicked up to ICU when he needed it.
So, needed or not, he gets kicked up to ICU. Protocol in that situation will be to not tell us directly what's going on anyway.
I wish I'd thought about it from the nurses' perspective two days ago.
Well that didn't take long...twitter trending with BorisTheButcher again....demanding he be held responsible for every death.
From the same people demanding the lockdown ends NOW?
The people demanding an end to lockdown now seem to be almost exclusively the more Neanderthal Leavers, who seem to see Covid-19 as a plot to delay Brexit, or at the very least to reduce the value of their investments.
I have seen a number of the people who seem to coming from the whole anti-vax, goop, environmental fruit cake* believing line, going for this as well.
*Environmentalism as a religion without reference to facts. As opposed to, say, reducing carbon emission each year as part of an orderly policy to achieve a zero carbon society.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Key word in your paragraphs is the word "had". They "had" a value but modern science has turned that on its head. Modern science does not endorse having sex with your cousin. Hence why I didn't say that religion should never have existed, instead that it belongs in the past. When it "had" value.
I know that these things had value and have thought about them. Had.
The problem with religion - and especially Orthodox versions - and what links it to the cultural issues is that it tries to bind people to the beliefs of the past. The idea that someone is quoting the unerring word of god makes it impossible to learn from the present and the past and to move on from the past. It is too conservative with a small c.
This is the 21st century. We need to learn from the past but be prepared to let go of it too. We don't need to shag our cousins.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
Indeed the rules made sense in the past. They belong to the past, which is what I said originally but for some reason Luckyguy1983 objected to that.
New moths for the year last night included Waved Umber, Lunar Marbled Brown and Brimstone Moth.
That is stunning. Do they get released?
Absolutely. Calling it a moth "trap" is a misnomer - really should be called a "lure". Just photo and them and release. (Unless it is something that needs to be collected for some scientific study. There are some species that just cannot be determined to species by observation. But that is quite rare.)
my local green space reckons to have some five-spot burnet moths. i've been through a few times as part of my daily exercise but not spotted one yet.
internet says they don't live in yorkshire so maybe they're six-spot and the information board is wrong. i've seen the six-spot at the local RSPB reserve. handsome fellows and happy to be out during the day.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
By the way, that should read 'wandering through the deserts'
If you were managing a ward in the NHS, and the Prime Minister came in sick with an illness that can kill unhealthy people, and older people, you'd be thinking that you don't want something to go wrong. If something goes wrong, there's questions asked about you in Parliament, you'll be in the papers, it's a total shitshow. Everyone will be wondering why he wasn't kicked up to ICU when he needed it.
So, needed or not, he gets kicked up to ICU. Protocol in that situation will be to not tell us directly what's going on anyway.
I wish I'd thought about it from the nurses' perspective two days ago.
I would have thought the pathetic word-police babies would have moved on by now. Clearly not.
I would have thought Stanley should have been pensioned off to spout his shite in the privacy of his own (1st, 2nd or 3rd) homes by now, but no, here, there and everywhere having said shite amplified across the nations.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
Indeed the rules made sense in the past. They belong to the past, which is what I said originally but for some reason Luckyguy1983 objected to that.
My point was, this is an outdated cultural tradition. There was no need to link this with religion at all.
Not nice but looking fairly stable over last few days which is actually a good thing. Equating to a daily rate of approx 650 - 700? (Bear in mind that 866 deaths occurred on 16 different days although mainly on the last 4 or 5 days.)
New moths for the year last night included Waved Umber, Lunar Marbled Brown and Brimstone Moth.
Really nice. I think they are quite common. They can be quite conspicuous at dusk flying out in the open. Usually see them at the bottom of my garden among the trees. Hope to attract them to my trap - but probably will be a few weeks from now as I'm 500 miles to the north of MM.
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Its a false dichotomy though. Science and technology can help us produce things cleaner and we can only do that if we're rich.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
Indeed the rules made sense in the past. They belong to the past, which is what I said originally but for some reason Luckyguy1983 objected to that.
My point was, this is an outdated cultural tradition. There was no need to link this with religion at all.
You linked with religion before me. The post I replied to referred to Orthodox Jews.
People cling to this cultural nonsense because of religious nonsense.
This is a serious challenge to Mike's conventional wisdom of what determines elections... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/joe-biden-democratic-nominee-why.html ...This has been true all along—and perhaps mysteriously, it has worked to Biden’s advantage. While Sanders and Elizabeth Warren supporters were louder, had an enormous online footprint, and advanced arguments and issues that have changed the party, it was Biden voters who turned out in droves in the primary, despite their silence online. This has made the nominee’s victory feel confusing. It demands an explanation that common-sense theories about how political enthusiasm, exposure, and airtime should affect turnout cannot provide. Despite an apparent lack of enthusiastic adherents, an associated lack of funds, underwhelming debate performances, and no clear agenda, Biden floated to victory. The question is why—and can whatever powered him to the top do the same in the general?...
Fuck me..only 49%.....if you don't feel more anxious or depressed at this time with the zombie apocalypse being enacted outside our homes what would have to happen to make these 51% more anxious than usual....
New moths for the year last night included Waved Umber, Lunar Marbled Brown and Brimstone Moth.
Really nice. I think they are quite common. They can be quite conspicuous at dusk flying out in the open. Usually see them at the bottom of my garden among the trees. Hope to attract them to my trap - but probably will be a few weeks from now as I'm 500 miles to the north of MM.
I hope you are not murdering these moths for some kind of collection...please let me know the moths are unharmed....
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Its a false dichotomy though. Science and technology can help us produce things cleaner and we can only do that if we're rich.
Probably more a question of poor wording. A key aim and objective of prosperity should be improving our environment and one aspect of that should be utilising technological innovation to improve air quality.
Progress has been made - cars are infinitely cleaner than they were but there are more of them and it's probable the days of diesel are numbered.
To try to get round my Friday dichotomy I'd argue the goal of prosperity should be the improvement of the environment rather than simple material enhancement while accepting there's a place for the latter.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
You could always move out of London.
I'd rather we tackled the problem collectively than I choose to run away from it. In any case, poor air quality and pollution are everywhere not just at street level in London.
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Fuck me..only 49%.....if you don't feel more anxious or depressed at this time with the zombie apocalypse being enacted outside our homes what would have to happen to make these 51% more anxious than usual....
Gotta die of something. And the bell tolls for all of us at some point.
When I'm dead, I won't know about it. So why worry about it? Why worry about something out of your control?
My investment portfolio, on the other hand, worries me greatly. For it is sure to have a long-term impact on my quality of life.
The 22% worried about their finances seems rather low to me. I suppose most people are happy to be enjoying a 3 month holiday on 80% of their salary.
But do they really expect the government to keep paying them in four months, five months, six, if the lockdown continues? And if it does not, will they still have jobs?
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
Indeed the rules made sense in the past. They belong to the past, which is what I said originally but for some reason Luckyguy1983 objected to that.
The Ten Commandments still stand up pretty well in the modern world, can’t imagine many people disagree with any of them.
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
New moths for the year last night included Waved Umber, Lunar Marbled Brown and Brimstone Moth.
Really nice. I think they are quite common. They can be quite conspicuous at dusk flying out in the open. Usually see them at the bottom of my garden among the trees. Hope to attract them to my trap - but probably will be a few weeks from now as I'm 500 miles to the north of MM.
I hope you are not murdering these moths for some kind of collection...please let me know the moths are unharmed....
Let your mind be at peace. The moths are certainly unharmed. Released in the morning. Some are a bit dozy and are carefully placed somewhere safe in the garden.
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
This is a serious challenge to Mike's conventional wisdom of what determines elections... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/joe-biden-democratic-nominee-why.html ...This has been true all along—and perhaps mysteriously, it has worked to Biden’s advantage. While Sanders and Elizabeth Warren supporters were louder, had an enormous online footprint, and advanced arguments and issues that have changed the party, it was Biden voters who turned out in droves in the primary, despite their silence online. This has made the nominee’s victory feel confusing. It demands an explanation that common-sense theories about how political enthusiasm, exposure, and airtime should affect turnout cannot provide. Despite an apparent lack of enthusiastic adherents, an associated lack of funds, underwhelming debate performances, and no clear agenda, Biden floated to victory. The question is why—and can whatever powered him to the top do the same in the general?...
That's an excellent (and witty) piece. Let's hope he's right.
Is pollution the reason some places are more affected by Covid-19 than others? Lombardy, Wuhan and London are bad I think
“Conclusions: A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in COVID-19 death rate, with the magnitude of increase 20 times that observed for PM2.5 and all-cause mortality. The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis. The data and code are publicly available.”
People have mentioned that BAMEs are disproportionately dying from Covid19. Could it be because they tend to live in cities with bad pollution problems rather than any genetic/racial disposition?
They also have higher rates of diabetes and heart disease. There is a genetic disposition for that.
I am sure things such as more likely to be living in high density housing, in high density urban with higher pollution environments, higher rates of comorbidities, and more likely to be working customer facing jobs.
And finally, religion. Going to organized religious events, they are a key transport vector.
That would be a problem in the Orthodox Jewish population too.
In both cases, it is a practise that belongs in the past.
Like religion in general.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Not sure why you're blaming religion. It is not the wellspring of all cultural traditions. I also don't know why you (and so many other atheists) are so bothered about what others believe. It's not very libertarian. If we change from being an intolerant religious society to an intolerant atheist one we haven't gained anything.
I'm happy to tolerate foolish beliefs. I'm also happy to mock them.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
First cousin marriage had a very practical reason (in all societies) when family wealth and dynasties were all important. It is certainly not a core tenet of Christianity, probably not of Judaism and Islam (which I know less about). It is a cultural tradition that coincides with the latter two faiths. You're trying to make it all the fault of religion when it isn't.
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the desserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
Quite - most of the rules are highly practical for living in a world before wide spread food safety, for example. Shellfish were a notorious dice with death thing in the Goode Olde Days*
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
Indeed the rules made sense in the past. They belong to the past, which is what I said originally but for some reason Luckyguy1983 objected to that.
The Ten Commandments still stand up pretty well in the modern world, can’t imagine many people disagree with any of them.
A rip-off from the 42 Negative Confessions in ancient Egypt! Remember, Moses was brought up in the Egyptian court.
The peak was going to be this weekend according to the medical experts. Let's hope they are right but clearly the journey from here to easing lock down restrictions is going to be a long one.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Its a false dichotomy though. Science and technology can help us produce things cleaner and we can only do that if we're rich.
I'm not sure that "the medical experts" are a homogenous group.
If you were managing a ward in the NHS, and the Prime Minister came in sick with an illness that can kill unhealthy people, and older people, you'd be thinking that you don't want something to go wrong. If something goes wrong, there's questions asked about you in Parliament, you'll be in the papers, it's a total shitshow. Everyone will be wondering why he wasn't kicked up to ICU when he needed it.
So, needed or not, he gets kicked up to ICU. Protocol in that situation will be to not tell us directly what's going on anyway.
I wish I'd thought about it from the nurses' perspective two days ago.
I've just had another thought. What happens to the PM's personal protection types?
Comments
There should have been zero tolerance of anyone involved in antisemitism. At least as far as promotions are concerned. To promote someone who has been antisemitic sends entirely the wrong message.
The sooner people leave the occult to the past and to fiction the better.
Where's the discrepancy in that? If you want to believe that some mystical Sky Fairy is OK with you having sex with your cousin but is disturbed by you eating pork and takes attendance as to whether you worship Him properly then why should I not find that absurd?
(The birds, rather than the band reforming.)
Not eating pork also had a very good reason, as (whilst I'd never give up bacon myself) it is far more prone to carrying pathogens than other meats, so if you are an itinerant tribe wandering through the deserts living on the edge of survival, it made excellent sense, as did God's other commandments during that time.
If you actually think about things rather than immediately resort to silly Dawkins-esque 'zingers' about them you might learn something.
If you were managing a ward in the NHS, and the Prime Minister came in sick with an illness that can kill unhealthy people, and older people, you'd be thinking that you don't want something to go wrong. If something goes wrong, there's questions asked about you in Parliament, you'll be in the papers, it's a total shitshow. Everyone will be wondering why he wasn't kicked up to ICU when he needed it.
So, needed or not, he gets kicked up to ICU. Protocol in that situation will be to not tell us directly what's going on anyway.
I wish I'd thought about it from the nurses' perspective two days ago.
*Environmentalism as a religion without reference to facts. As opposed to, say, reducing carbon emission each year as part of an orderly policy to achieve a zero carbon society.
Turd? You don't Sa-ay!
cf. Meeks earlier.
Clamping down on boozing - well, examine the reasons that temperance formed a major plank of many socialistic party platform in the 19th Cent/early 20th.
*Which weren't good, by any modern criteria.
I know that these things had value and have thought about them. Had.
The problem with religion - and especially Orthodox versions - and what links it to the cultural issues is that it tries to bind people to the beliefs of the past. The idea that someone is quoting the unerring word of god makes it impossible to learn from the present and the past and to move on from the past. It is too conservative with a small c.
This is the 21st century. We need to learn from the past but be prepared to let go of it too. We don't need to shag our cousins.
internet says they don't live in yorkshire so maybe they're six-spot and the information board is wrong. i've seen the six-spot at the local RSPB reserve. handsome fellows and happy to be out during the day.
Its very addictive. Feels like 3 days non stop.
You do know not everyone who writes distasteful anti-Conservative or anti-Boris tweets is a member of the Labour Party?
Utterly absurd, but entertaining once you embrace the absurdity.
The remaining 29 deaths occurred in March, including one on March 5.
Interesting to read the link between PM 2.5 levels and the virus. I've long suspected viruses and other microbial matter interacts with pollutants - pollens certainly do. We could do a lot use than try to improve air quality and if this provides a kick up the backside to do that I won't argue.
Is it so unreasonable to prefer being poorer and having cleaner air to breathe than being richer and polluted?
Think i would give it about that too.
People cling to this cultural nonsense because of religious nonsense.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/joe-biden-democratic-nominee-why.html
...This has been true all along—and perhaps mysteriously, it has worked to Biden’s advantage. While Sanders and Elizabeth Warren supporters were louder, had an enormous online footprint, and advanced arguments and issues that have changed the party, it was Biden voters who turned out in droves in the primary, despite their silence online. This has made the nominee’s victory feel confusing. It demands an explanation that common-sense theories about how political enthusiasm, exposure, and airtime should affect turnout cannot provide. Despite an apparent lack of enthusiastic adherents, an associated lack of funds, underwhelming debate performances, and no clear agenda, Biden floated to victory. The question is why—and can whatever powered him to the top do the same in the general?...
Progress has been made - cars are infinitely cleaner than they were but there are more of them and it's probable the days of diesel are numbered.
To try to get round my Friday dichotomy I'd argue the goal of prosperity should be the improvement of the environment rather than simple material enhancement while accepting there's a place for the latter.
When I'm dead, I won't know about it. So why worry about it? Why worry about something out of your control?
My investment portfolio, on the other hand, worries me greatly. For it is sure to have a long-term impact on my quality of life.
The 22% worried about their finances seems rather low to me. I suppose most people are happy to be enjoying a 3 month holiday on 80% of their salary.
But do they really expect the government to keep paying them in four months, five months, six, if the lockdown continues? And if it does not, will they still have jobs?
https://www.racingpost.com/news/comment/anti-gambling-hardliners-cant-self-isolate-themselves-from-the-facts/431352
https://houseoftruth.education/en/library/sacred-writings/egyptian-book-of-the-dead-42-negative-confessions
I'm still expecting it rather later.
That sounds very Corbynite in its unwillingness to act....