One thing that makes it difficult online is the lack of other information to go with profiles. EG I'd be curious to know the age profile of the BBC debate. I'm 37 and I'm curious if anyone my age or younger is on the side of compulsory BBC payments.
It does seem (no disrespect intended) that the desire to see the BBC paid for by all is a metric of the elderly. While simultaneously not wanting the elderly to pay for it!
The difference between most young-old debates though is that as people get older their views change on many things, but I wager it won't on the BBC. People who've grown up to view entertainment on a plethora of platforms aren't going to grow up into viewing the BBC as special for entertainment above all others.
Some findings that may surprise you: "There was more support for the BBC being funded by the licence fee than by any of the alternatives. Over half (54%) chose the current fee or a variant with more exemptions for those on lower incomes."
"More people saw the current licence fee as being good value (44%) rather than bad value (32%) "
"women being more favourable [towards the BBC] than men (6.6 v 6.3) and younger people (6.8) more positive than the over-25s (6.4)."
They don't surprise me but they should appall anyone who believes in the licence fee.
Barely a majority support the licence fee "or a variant" - that's not a healthy consensus to expect it to last long.
A third consider it bad value for money - hardly a surprise either. That not even a majority consider it being good value for money is not a good sign for longevity of the Beeb either.
That younger people are more positive does surprise me, but then they've done the threshold of "not young" as "over-25s" and there's not that big of a difference there. I don't think Beeb lovers should see those 18-24 year olds as being overly in love with the Beeb.
The BBC needs a kick up the arse. It’s news operation is complacent. It’s drama is too worthy. Much of its output is very predictable.
But scrap the BBC? Fuck off. It’s a great national asset, like the NHS, the monarchy, the armed forces, and the National Trust.
I don't think anyone said it should be scrapped.
Those who want it should voluntarily subscribe to it. There already is a subscription fee, just break the link to having to pay for it if you wish to watch other live TV channels would be my only adjustment.
This amounts to scrapping it, as far as I am concerned.
Just fund it through taxation, with some kind of lock on the funding to safeguard its non-political role.
Next.
If that amounts to scrapping it you are admitting its a service that people don't think is worth the money when given the choice and that they would instead choose other service.
Your takeaway from that is lets force them to pay for it anyway via tax even though they don't consider it value for money ?
I haven't had a tv license or tv for about a decade frankly as I long ago discovered that what was broadcast had no value to me and I really don't see why I should be expected to pay for your entertainment just because you like it.
Yes.
Public service broadcasting even benefits people who don’t watch it.
See also, public health services, public education systems, public transport networks etc.
The bbc does very little public service broadcasting 99.9% of its output is crap like eastenders and bake off / home/ holiday ripoffs.
You want it you pay for it. It is no benefit to me in the least and no nor do I listen to the radio. If the bbc disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't affect how informed people are in the slightest.
“I have no kids, why do I have to pay for schools”. Just pure selfishness.
I have no love for the argument that "I don't use something so I don't see why I should have to pay for it". Sheer libertarian twaddle. People benefit from the BBC in plenty of ways, from weather forecast distribution to enjoying soap operas. It's the key vector for important national news, is the default channel for most radio listeners because it understands its audience. It has a public education role (and produces the best documentaries in the world) which it is good at, and its kids TV has been superb ever since I was a kid.
There is a world of difference between educating our children which helps the country and people being able to enjoy master chef or what it is called.
Educational films are better done by youtube Weather you can get direct from any number of weather forecasters without needing some overdressed presenter News there are plenty of source Best documentaries in the world? opinion sorry about the only thing I rate is some of the wildlife stuff and that is usually made by third parties in any case. Kids tv is available widely on netflix, prime, disney
There is nothing the bbc does that is not done better elsewhere
I just read Michael Lewis's latest work.
Interestingly, the independent weather forecasts all depend on government funded work (he was referring to the US, but I assume it is the same in the UK)
The met office being government funded though has no bearing on the BBC argument especially as they don't even use the Met office for their forecasts they use someone called the Meteo group since 2018 which is I think dutch
Meteo gets its data from the Dutch government.
Fundamentally weather forecasting is good because of access to things like the ocean surface buoy data from NOAH. In the US private weather companies don't pay for that data (the government isn't allowed to charge for it) but they then package and sell it.
If the government stopped collecting the data it wouldn't be economic to do it privately.
I wonder if the government will have the guts and integrity to adopt the only approach to the economic crisis which is both feasible and fair - higher and steeply progressive taxation with a focus on wealth.
If they do I'll be voting Conservative next time, Starmer or no Starmer.
And if they do it I won't be voting Conservative next time, Boris or no Boris
Boris is instinctively a big state spender. This crisis will make him even more so. He is also a social liberal. The Conservative Party won the last election but what follows will probably be unrecognisable to economic or social conservatives. Cheer away because your side won but in many respects a Boris Government is not going to look much different from a Blair one.
If he wins three thumping election victories I daresay he will be forgiven for a certain latitude in fiscal matters.
Spoke to my local independent cycle repair shop, and so many people are cycling that they are so busy they need one week's advance notice for a bike service.
Being out on the bike is like the 1940s. Cars? What cars.
My only complaint about cyclists is the way a lot of them in places like London seem to think it's okay to go through red lights.
100% agreed.
Cyclists who obey the law I have no problems with. Cyclist law breakers I do.
I'm not a cyclist but the Highway code should be amended to go left (cautiously) on red.
I 100% agree with that one too!
A car (or any other vehicle) turning left on red cautiously is safer than cyclists simply going straight on at a red whenever they want to do so.
Wait for the first accident where a car turning left on red is hit by a cyclist going straight on, through the red, on their inside.
Err yes cars can't turn left on red ! Cyclists should be able to - unless there is a pedestrian crossing on the left in which case they should exercise caution and give way to pedestrians crossing.
Why should cyclists be able to but not cars?
If anyone can it should be the same for all - like in America cars can turn right on red if its safe to do so.
I'm not arguing on any particular side, but I guess the consequences of a car driver getting this wrong would be more disastrous than those of a cyclist doing so.
I doubt it. A car driver getting this wrong and hitting another car (if both cars aren't driving fast) is probably safer than a cyclist getting this wrong and hitting another car.
Just because a cyclist screwing up may only kill himself and not others is no consolation for those involved in an accident that results in death.
One thing that makes it difficult online is the lack of other information to go with profiles. EG I'd be curious to know the age profile of the BBC debate. I'm 37 and I'm curious if anyone my age or younger is on the side of compulsory BBC payments.
It does seem (no disrespect intended) that the desire to see the BBC paid for by all is a metric of the elderly. While simultaneously not wanting the elderly to pay for it!
The difference between most young-old debates though is that as people get older their views change on many things, but I wager it won't on the BBC. People who've grown up to view entertainment on a plethora of platforms aren't going to grow up into viewing the BBC as special for entertainment above all others.
Some findings that may surprise you: "There was more support for the BBC being funded by the licence fee than by any of the alternatives. Over half (54%) chose the current fee or a variant with more exemptions for those on lower incomes."
"More people saw the current licence fee as being good value (44%) rather than bad value (32%) "
"women being more favourable [towards the BBC] than men (6.6 v 6.3) and younger people (6.8) more positive than the over-25s (6.4)."
They don't surprise me but they should appall anyone who believes in the licence fee.
Barely a majority support the licence fee "or a variant" - that's not a healthy consensus to expect it to last long.
A third consider it bad value for money - hardly a surprise either. That not even a majority consider it being good value for money is not a good sign for longevity of the Beeb either.
That younger people are more positive does surprise me, but then they've done the threshold of "not young" as "over-25s" and there's not that big of a difference there. I don't think Beeb lovers should see those 18-24 year olds as being overly in love with the Beeb.
over 25's are more likely to have started having to pay for their tv is probably the answer. People are always more favourable to stuff they aren't paying for.
Not even sure where they got 54% from on the variant as no option scored over 50% and as I noted missed options like subscription only altogether of questioning the actual figures were
Good Bad Lower fee for some 49% 24% current fee 47% 22% universal levy 37% 34% lower fee & sub 34% 38% current fee & sub 28% 43%
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
What are the Dutch doing at Schipol?
I ask because I think the British assumption is that cases will enter the country anyway and monitoring would give rise to a false sense of security.
The Dutch are doing pretty much the same as us.
Monitoring doesn't work because asymptomatic carriers by definition don't have a temperature. Quarantining for 14 days is the approach adopted by most countries for arrivals (those who haven't banned foreign arrivals or transit pax absolutely - like Singapore, for example). Most are doing it by "Stay at Home Notices".
Aren't all these arrivals in the UK going directly into lock-down anyway, so the call for them to be quarantined is a bit of a distinction without a difference?
They're being 'asked' to go into lock-down on the assumption that they'll sensibly & responsibly sort this out themselves, which is an act of faith on the part of the government imo.
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
Viewed another way this is one of the (many) excellent arguments against private schools. In their absence the influential and affluent would be invested in the state sector and this would feed through to higher general standards.
Not really, the wealthy just game the system by moving into the catchment area of a good state school.
Are we, somewhat belatedly, starting to see the price that Sweden is paying for not having an official lockdown?
For Sweden the lastest figures show new cases steady at around 500/day. There were nearly 200 deaths yesterday, but this could be due to data issues related to Easter.
Sweden has 1166 recorded COVID cases per million of population, while the UK has 1478 recorded COVID cases per million of population.
Sweden has 118 recorded COVID deaths per million of population, while the UK has 193 recorded COVID deaths per million of population. (Source GitHub/COVID-19/csse_covid_19_data).
Spoke to my local independent cycle repair shop, and so many people are cycling that they are so busy they need one week's advance notice for a bike service.
Being out on the bike is like the 1940s. Cars? What cars.
My only complaint about cyclists is the way a lot of them in places like London seem to think it's okay to go through red lights.
100% agreed.
Cyclists who obey the law I have no problems with. Cyclist law breakers I do.
I'm not a cyclist but the Highway code should be amended to go left (cautiously) on red.
I 100% agree with that one too!
A car (or any other vehicle) turning left on red cautiously is safer than cyclists simply going straight on at a red whenever they want to do so.
Wait for the first accident where a car turning left on red is hit by a cyclist going straight on, through the red, on their inside.
Err yes cars can't turn left on red ! Cyclists should be able to - unless there is a pedestrian crossing on the left in which case they should exercise caution and give way to pedestrians crossing.
Why should cyclists be able to but not cars?
If anyone can it should be the same for all - like in America cars can turn right on red if its safe to do so.
I'm not arguing on any particular side, but I guess the consequences of a car driver getting this wrong would be more disastrous than those of a cyclist doing so.
I doubt it. A car driver getting this wrong and hitting another car (if both cars aren't driving fast) is probably safer than a cyclist getting this wrong and hitting another car.
Just because a cyclist screwing up may only kill himself and not others is no consolation for those involved in an accident that results in death.
I was thinking more of a pedestrian being hit, but as I said I'm not really arguing for it.
Poor figures from Spain again today more than 5000 new cases and more than 500 new deaths. Still a long way to go.
Is their truly any evidence that lockdowns work or is the virus just following its curve?
The spanish Health service is very good but has come close to collapse this time. Very close indeed. No lockdown would have been a massacre of the people and the service.
Spain has been in a severe lockdown for 34 days, yet there were 5000 new cases yesterday. Italy has been in lockdown for 38 days, yet there were 3000 new cases yesterday.
It may be that without a lockdown the number of cases would have been 100 times higher, but is there any evidence of that?
Well the evidence is there in the fact that the growth in cases pre-lockdown was massively more than it is now with no flattening of the curve. Had that been allowed to continue the hospitals would have been overwhelmed throughout the country instead of just in a few areas. The curve has been flattened considerably but the lag is considerable. You seem to not appreciate how dangerous the position is.
What I fail to understand is how 34 days into a lockdown there can be 5000 new cases when this virus needs human to human contact to infect. As you have said the lockdown in Spain has been vigourously enforced and people are complying. I understand families and lag etc but 5000 cases after 34 days of not going out, and those that do social distance etc is a very high figure
This is hugely infectious disease, hence why really the only way you can full protect healthcare workers is full on spacesuits.
All it needs is somebody to touch a plastic or metal surface in the community and you can quite innocently also touch it and then rub your eyes or mouth. Supermarkets are prime transmission vectors.
I did notice in the UK coverage, how many people in parks doing their daily exercises, were going to up metal poles / railings and doing their stretches by holding on to them. I thought that seems incredibly dumb thing to do.
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
What are the Dutch doing at Schipol?
I ask because I think the British assumption is that cases will enter the country anyway and monitoring would give rise to a false sense of security.
The Dutch are doing pretty much the same as us.
Monitoring doesn't work because asymptomatic carriers by definition don't have a temperature. Quarantining for 14 days is the approach adopted by most countries for arrivals (those who haven't banned foreign arrivals or transit pax absolutely - like Singapore, for example). Most are doing it by "Stay at Home Notices".
Aren't all these arrivals in the UK going directly into lock-down anyway, so the call for them to be quarantined is a bit of a distinction without a difference?
People are still working, people are still going to the supermarket, people are still panting around the streets on their daily jog.
And they can do all those the day after flying in from who knows where.
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
A relative of mine and his family have returned from the Far East. Now quarantined at home for 14 days. But who polices that? Can he nip to Waitrose when running short of milk?
Air travel was the single most efficient conduit for Covid-19, and we are still at it!
The Guernsey advice for "self quarantine on arrival" is very clear - you go directly home (no popping to the shops en-route) and shut the door behind you. For 14 days. If you haven't got food at home and no friends to buy it for you the local supermarkets are delivering.
In Singapore the penalties for not complying with a "Stay at Home Notice" are: (a) in the case of a first offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both; and (b) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.
Why pick on Ollie Robbins? I thought he was just a masochistic Remainer who gladly went along with everything Barnier proposed. Surely DD, who genuinely thought he could give the EU a fight, should be the main object of your ire.
I thought Robbins did OK. He negotiated a deal which the EU were not massively keen on. Of course if he had known we were prepared to cave in and accept the EU's first choice deal - the one which effectively annexed Northern Ireland - his job would have been much easier. Could have been done & dusted by end of 2018.
Browsing Betfair this morning I can see that, at some point, someone had £360 matched laying Michelle Obama as VP pick at 4.8, and I'm physically sick with envy.
Some of the matches on the various US markets are absolutely disgusting.
One thing that makes it difficult online is the lack of other information to go with profiles. EG I'd be curious to know the age profile of the BBC debate. I'm 37 and I'm curious if anyone my age or younger is on the side of compulsory BBC payments.
It does seem (no disrespect intended) that the desire to see the BBC paid for by all is a metric of the elderly. While simultaneously not wanting the elderly to pay for it!
The difference between most young-old debates though is that as people get older their views change on many things, but I wager it won't on the BBC. People who've grown up to view entertainment on a plethora of platforms aren't going to grow up into viewing the BBC as special for entertainment above all others.
Some findings that may surprise you: "There was more support for the BBC being funded by the licence fee than by any of the alternatives. Over half (54%) chose the current fee or a variant with more exemptions for those on lower incomes."
"More people saw the current licence fee as being good value (44%) rather than bad value (32%) "
"women being more favourable [towards the BBC] than men (6.6 v 6.3) and younger people (6.8) more positive than the over-25s (6.4)."
They don't surprise me but they should appall anyone who believes in the licence fee.
Barely a majority support the licence fee "or a variant" - that's not a healthy consensus to expect it to last long.
A third consider it bad value for money - hardly a surprise either. That not even a majority consider it being good value for money is not a good sign for longevity of the Beeb either.
That younger people are more positive does surprise me, but then they've done the threshold of "not young" as "over-25s" and there's not that big of a difference there. I don't think Beeb lovers should see those 18-24 year olds as being overly in love with the Beeb.
You won't know what you've lost til it's gone.
You're right I won't because I don't need it.
Luddites always think that.
I've already lost almost anything I valued from the BBC. It really isn't what it used to be even ten years ago. The only things left are Only Connect and Richard Osman's House of Games. Neither of which, frankly, are fundamental to my life.
Quiz questions: @rcs1000 This was mine from last week. Think carefully before answering. Difficulty: medium QUIZ Questions - not the expected answer
1. Wife and I had Bombay Duck for dinner. What type of animal did we eat? 2. An aeroplane contains a device called a Flight Data Recorder, that is used to help investigate accidents. Commonly known as the Black Box, what colour is it? 3. What is the chemical symbol for the element Potassium? 4. Before the discovery of Mt Everest, what was the world’s tallest mountain? 5. A doctor gives you three pills and says to take one every 30 minutes. How long do they last? 6. According to the world records, the highest speed men’s running race is held over what distance? 7. If you navigate the Suez Canal by boat, how many locks do you have to pass through? 8. Launched in 2008, what was the name given to the second generation iPhone? 9. Write down the number eleven thousand, eleven hundred and eleven 10. Where is the Sea of Tranquility?
Extra Questions 1. What has four eyes and runs 2,000 miles? 2. Who is the Prime Minister of France? 3. Rapper Eminem was in a band called D12. Otherwise known as the Dirty Dozen, how many members did this band have?
TIE BREAKER Airbus A380 - How many people evacuated in 90 seconds for certification test? (plane was full of economy seats).
QUIZ Answers.
1. Fish 2. Orange (or red) 3. K (Po is Polonium, don’t get them confused!) 4. Mt Everest 5. 60 minutes (0m, 30m and 60m) 6. 400m (4x100m relay) 7. None (the Panama Canal is the one with the big locks) 8. iPhone 3G 9. 12,111 (11,111 is 11k *one* hundred and 11) 10. On the Moon
Extras 1. Mississippi 2. Eduard Philippe 3. Six (Each had two names) TIE BREAKER - 873 people!
5 is misleading - arguably the medical effect of the pills lasts 90m, even though you consume the last one at 60m
60' after taking the first one, you have none left. Most people instinctively think it's 90'
I agree. But "how long do they last" is not the same as "when do you run out of pills"
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
"US intelligence is reviewing sensitive intelligence collection aimed at the Chinese government, according to the intelligence source, as they pursue the theory. But some intelligence officials say it is possible the actual cause may never be know"
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
So you said earlier that parents who can afford to pay for school are forced to, whereas those who can't (presumably) have their fees paid by the government? In that case, do you believe that both sets of parents would move their children to a different school if they were unhappy with the standard, or only the paying parent?
I suspect that the paying parents, assuming they were in the majority, would have a general uplifting effect that benefited all.
If transferable vouchers were given to poorer parents, then yes they would also be supplying feedback.
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
What are the Dutch doing at Schipol?
I ask because I think the British assumption is that cases will enter the country anyway and monitoring would give rise to a false sense of security.
The Dutch are doing pretty much the same as us.
Monitoring doesn't work because asymptomatic carriers by definition don't have a temperature. Quarantining for 14 days is the approach adopted by most countries for arrivals (those who haven't banned foreign arrivals or transit pax absolutely - like Singapore, for example). Most are doing it by "Stay at Home Notices".
Aren't all these arrivals in the UK going directly into lock-down anyway, so the call for them to be quarantined is a bit of a distinction without a difference?
No.
They can leave their homes i) to go to work, if you can't wfh ii) shop for essentials, iii) exercise, iv) take care of medical needs.
More likely no-one can decide whether the cream or jam goes on first until Boris is fully recuperated. Dom did not appoint the Cabinet to think for themselves. The government's failure to get a grip will be ruthlessly exploited by Starmer unless Sir Keith Kieth started by announcing he did not want to criticise the government. Oh.
Johnson is in a fantastic position right now. Most of the country believes that through a mixture of his indomitable spirit and the NHS miracle workers involved in his care he has just come through a near death experience in a personal battle against the very virus the nation is at war with. This is PR gold and he will not want to jeopardize it by returning to the fray too quickly. If he did there is a risk of people going, “hang on, he looks OK to me, was he really quite as sick as they were making out?” Whatever the answer to this it is not a question he wants out there being floated. So, rest assured we will not see him chairing cabinets or cobras or fronting up daily pressers any time soon. What we will get is the occasional short and inspirational video in which he talks directly to his people. To us. Behind the scenes, however, he will be in charge. I expect the line within government is that he is a little too weak to be doing things like reading documents, especially any with lots of numbers in, but is absolutely up to making the big “Great Man” calls based on being orally briefed by his key colleagues and advisors, especially Michael Gove. So, all in all, if you’re Boris Johnson, a most satisfactory state of affairs and one he will be keen to prolong for as long as is humanly possible.
The video from last week was remarkable. He was at death's door but came out with a video that most people thought was sincere. Which at the same time rehearsed the soundbites several times ("engaged in a national battle"), set himself up as the Churchill of the moment and contained the typical Johnsonian contradictions (Does he still think Luis from Porto has been treating the UK as his own country for too long?)
When it comes to holding China to account for anything, I don't hold my breath e.g. Analysis of official deceased organ donation data casts doubt on the credibility of China’s organ transplant reform
China have repeatedly claimed they stopped doing this, not only do the numbers not add up, even two months ago they performed the worlds first double lung transplant after finding a donor in less than 5 days. Given they have bugger all people on their donor lists, chances of somebody having died on the list with exactly the correct genetics and both lungs in perfect shape (during a CV outbreak) is just not credible.
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
"US intelligence is reviewing sensitive intelligence collection aimed at the Chinese government, according to the intelligence source, as they pursue the theory. But some intelligence officials say it is possible the actual cause may never be know"
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
If they can prove it to a level satisfactory to even many who would be wary of upsetting the Chinese government I think it would definitely be worth it for them to reveal it.
Browsing Betfair this morning I can see that, at some point, someone had £360 matched laying Michelle Obama as VP pick at 4.8, and I'm physically sick with envy.
Some of the matches on the various US markets are absolutely disgusting.
I was pleased to lay Mitt Romney at 14/1. It's really strange when these stupid bets have won me more than any considered betting (overall).
Quiz questions: @rcs1000 This was mine from last week. Think carefully before answering. Difficulty: medium QUIZ Questions - not the expected answer
1. Wife and I had Bombay Duck for dinner. What type of animal did we eat? 2. An aeroplane contains a device called a Flight Data Recorder, that is used to help investigate accidents. Commonly known as the Black Box, what colour is it? 3. What is the chemical symbol for the element Potassium? 4. Before the discovery of Mt Everest, what was the world’s tallest mountain? 5. A doctor gives you three pills and says to take one every 30 minutes. How long do they last? 6. According to the world records, the highest speed men’s running race is held over what distance? 7. If you navigate the Suez Canal by boat, how many locks do you have to pass through? 8. Launched in 2008, what was the name given to the second generation iPhone? 9. Write down the number eleven thousand, eleven hundred and eleven 10. Where is the Sea of Tranquility?
Extra Questions 1. What has four eyes and runs 2,000 miles? 2. Who is the Prime Minister of France? 3. Rapper Eminem was in a band called D12. Otherwise known as the Dirty Dozen, how many members did this band have?
TIE BREAKER Airbus A380 - How many people evacuated in 90 seconds for certification test? (plane was full of economy seats).
QUIZ Answers.
1. Fish 2. Orange (or red) 3. K (Po is Polonium, don’t get them confused!) 4. Mt Everest 5. 60 minutes (0m, 30m and 60m) 6. 400m (4x100m relay) 7. None (the Panama Canal is the one with the big locks) 8. iPhone 3G 9. 12,111 (11,111 is 11k *one* hundred and 11) 10. On the Moon
Extras 1. Mississippi 2. Eduard Philippe 3. Six (Each had two names) TIE BREAKER - 873 people!
5 is misleading - arguably the medical effect of the pills lasts 90m, even though you consume the last one at 60m
60' after taking the first one, you have none left. Most people instinctively think it's 90'
I would say the pills last 30 minutes. Otherwise why take them at intervals?
It’s a matter of semantics. The pills last sixty minutes, the effect of those pills (as implied by the time gap) lasts ninety minutes. The effect of individual pills is implied to be thirty minutes. The ‘they’ in this sentence can be read differently, although the assumption is pills plural not singular.
Except those with a brain, both him and Gove are absolute arses. Would be too tough to expect him to read a few sheets of paper, that might sound like work.
Well I see Gove hoovering up material and orally briefing his master - the PM - at least twice a day as he lies in his four poster at Chequers.
All very well but if it goes on too long there will start to be a "malingering Johnson" feel about proceedings.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
Spoke to my local independent cycle repair shop, and so many people are cycling that they are so busy they need one week's advance notice for a bike service.
Being out on the bike is like the 1940s. Cars? What cars.
My only complaint about cyclists is the way a lot of them in places like London seem to think it's okay to go through red lights.
100% agreed.
Cyclists who obey the law I have no problems with. Cyclist law breakers I do.
I'm not a cyclist but the Highway code should be amended to go left (cautiously) on red.
I 100% agree with that one too!
A car (or any other vehicle) turning left on red cautiously is safer than cyclists simply going straight on at a red whenever they want to do so.
Wait for the first accident where a car turning left on red is hit by a cyclist going straight on, through the red, on their inside.
Err yes cars can't turn left on red ! Cyclists should be able to - unless there is a pedestrian crossing on the left in which case they should exercise caution and give way to pedestrians crossing.
Ah, so the cyclist turns left and realises the turn is too sharp for their speed, so they swing out and collide with a car going straight across the junction on green from their right
Browsing Betfair this morning I can see that, at some point, someone had £360 matched laying Michelle Obama as VP pick at 4.8, and I'm physically sick with envy.
Some of the matches on the various US markets are absolutely disgusting.
I was pleased to lay Mitt Romney at 14/1. It's really strange when these stupid bets have won me more than any considered betting (overall).
More likely no-one can decide whether the cream or jam goes on first until Boris is fully recuperated. Dom did not appoint the Cabinet to think for themselves. The government's failure to get a grip will be ruthlessly exploited by Starmer unless Sir Keith Kieth started by announcing he did not want to criticise the government. Oh.
Johnson is in a fantastic position right now. Most of the country believes that through a mixture of his indomitable spirit and the NHS miracle workers involved in his care he has just come through a near death experience in a personal battle against the very virus the nation is at war with. This is PR gold and he will not want to jeopardize it by returning to the fray too quickly. If he did there is a risk of people going, “hang on, he looks OK to me, was he really quite as sick as they were making out?” Whatever the answer to this it is not a question he wants out there being floated. So, rest assured we will not see him chairing cabinets or cobras or fronting up daily pressers any time soon. What we will get is the occasional short and inspirational video in which he talks directly to his people. To us. Behind the scenes, however, he will be in charge. I expect the line within government is that he is a little too weak to be doing things like reading documents, especially any with lots of numbers in, but is absolutely up to making the big “Great Man” calls based on being orally briefed by his key colleagues and advisors, especially Michael Gove. So, all in all, if you’re Boris Johnson, a most satisfactory state of affairs and one he will be keen to prolong for as long as is humanly possible.
The video from last week was remarkable. He was at death's door but came out with a video that most people thought was sincere. Which at the same time rehearsed the soundbites several times ("engaged in a national battle"), set himself up as the Churchill of the moment and contained the typical Johnsonian contradictions (Does he still think Luis from Porto has been treating the UK as his own country for too long?)
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
"US intelligence is reviewing sensitive intelligence collection aimed at the Chinese government, according to the intelligence source, as they pursue the theory. But some intelligence officials say it is possible the actual cause may never be know"
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
If they can prove it to a level satisfactory to even many who would be wary of upsetting the Chinese government I think it would definitely be worth it for them to reveal it.
Possible, but on the evidence so far, unlikely.
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 ....The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
More scientific data could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another. Obtaining related viral sequences from animal sources would be the most definitive way of revealing viral origins. For example, a future observation of an intermediate or fully formed polybasic cleavage site in a SARS-CoV-2-like virus from animals would lend even further support to the natural-selection hypotheses. It would also be helpful to obtain more genetic and functional data about SARS-CoV-2, including animal studies. The identification of a potential intermediate host of SARS-CoV-2, as well as sequencing of the virus from very early cases, would similarly be highly informative. Irrespective of the exact mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 originated via natural selection, the ongoing surveillance of pneumonia in humans and other animals is clearly of utmost importance...
The named authors on this paper carry considerably more weight in their field than "US intelligence".
Personally as long as the non-commercial bits of the BBC continued to be publicly funded in some way - like BBC News for instance, I'd be fine with the rest going to a subscription model.
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
A relative of mine and his family have returned from the Far East. Now quarantined at home for 14 days. But who polices that? Can he nip to Waitrose when running short of milk?
Air travel was the single most efficient conduit for Covid-19, and we are still at it!
The Guernsey advice for "self quarantine on arrival" is very clear - you go directly home (no popping to the shops en-route) and shut the door behind you. For 14 days. If you haven't got food at home and no friends to buy it for you the local supermarkets are delivering.
In Singapore the penalties for not complying with a "Stay at Home Notice" are: (a) in the case of a first offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both; and (b) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.
Was speaking to a polish colleague on monday. When he got back to poland from the UK after they'd slammed the border down and was put into home quarantine he had the local police turning up at random times every day to check he was in the house.
Poor figures from Spain again today more than 5000 new cases and more than 500 new deaths. Still a long way to go.
Is their truly any evidence that lockdowns work or is the virus just following its curve?
The spanish Health service is very good but has come close to collapse this time. Very close indeed. No lockdown would have been a massacre of the people and the service.
Spain has been in a severe lockdown for 34 days, yet there were 5000 new cases yesterday. Italy has been in lockdown for 38 days, yet there were 3000 new cases yesterday.
It may be that without a lockdown the number of cases would have been 100 times higher, but is there any evidence of that?
Well the evidence is there in the fact that the growth in cases pre-lockdown was massively more than it is now with no flattening of the curve. Had that been allowed to continue the hospitals would have been overwhelmed throughout the country instead of just in a few areas. The curve has been flattened considerably but the lag is considerable. You seem to not appreciate how dangerous the position is.
NH posts anecdotes that support his belief that it's all a fuss about nothing.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
Time for a game of 'Suggest the ultimate crap journo question on the virus':
"It is obvious now that we locked down far too late, but what the public really want to know is will it end this weekend?"
Spoke to my local independent cycle repair shop, and so many people are cycling that they are so busy they need one week's advance notice for a bike service.
Being out on the bike is like the 1940s. Cars? What cars.
My only complaint about cyclists is the way a lot of them in places like London seem to think it's okay to go through red lights.
100% agreed.
Cyclists who obey the law I have no problems with. Cyclist law breakers I do.
I'm not a cyclist but the Highway code should be amended to go left (cautiously) on red.
I 100% agree with that one too!
A car (or any other vehicle) turning left on red cautiously is safer than cyclists simply going straight on at a red whenever they want to do so.
Wait for the first accident where a car turning left on red is hit by a cyclist going straight on, through the red, on their inside.
Err yes cars can't turn left on red ! Cyclists should be able to - unless there is a pedestrian crossing on the left in which case they should exercise caution and give way to pedestrians crossing.
Ah, so the cyclist turns left and realises the turn is too sharp for their speed, so they swing out and collide with a car going straight across the junction on green from their right
Please, read what I'm writing properly - the cyclist turns left carefully keeping to the inside. It's safer than turning left on green if a truck is also turning left next to you (No they shouldn't be up the inside of a truck)
I wonder if the government will have the guts and integrity to adopt the only approach to the economic crisis which is both feasible and fair - higher and steeply progressive taxation with a focus on wealth.
If they do I'll be voting Conservative next time, Starmer or no Starmer.
And if they do it I won't be voting Conservative next time, Boris or no Boris
Boris is instinctively a big state spender. This crisis will make him even more so. He is also a social liberal. The Conservative Party won the last election but what follows will probably be unrecognisable to economic or social conservatives. Cheer away because your side won but in many respects a Boris Government is not going to look much different from a Blair one.
Blair did very little to raise revenue from either income or wealth, and my taxes have only gone up since he left office.
In a development that runs contrary to the rules of science and technology, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps claims to have invented a device that can detect the presence of coronavirus at a distance of 100 metres, writes Patrick Wintour, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The IRGC, subject to intense US sanctions and seen by Washington as the source of instability across the Middle East, unveiled the device earlier this week at a ceremony hosted by its commander Maj Gen Hossein Salami.
The device “creates a magnetic field, and by using an embedded bipolar virus, any infected area can be detected within a 100-metre radius”, according to the IRGC, which said the process takes under five seconds.
Salami said:
This device does not require blood transfusions and operates remotely and intelligently, i.e. it is used for mass screening and fully detects infected surfaces and people who are infected.
He said it would also act as a smart disinfectant since it would know which areas need disinfecting.
This is an amazing scientific phenomenon, and it has been tested in various hospitals, and it has answered more than 80% of its accuracy, and it will be a very good basis for any kind of virus.
It is fair to say that the device’s unveiling led to a degree of scepticism on social media, with some Iranians saying they did not know whether to laugh or cry.
Separately Babak Shokri, vice-chancellor of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences claimed Iran will be able to market a coronavirus-resistant fabric within a month.
Poor figures from Spain again today more than 5000 new cases and more than 500 new deaths. Still a long way to go.
Is their truly any evidence that lockdowns work or is the virus just following its curve?
The spanish Health service is very good but has come close to collapse this time. Very close indeed. No lockdown would have been a massacre of the people and the service.
Spain has been in a severe lockdown for 34 days, yet there were 5000 new cases yesterday. Italy has been in lockdown for 38 days, yet there were 3000 new cases yesterday.
It may be that without a lockdown the number of cases would have been 100 times higher, but is there any evidence of that?
Well the evidence is there in the fact that the growth in cases pre-lockdown was massively more than it is now with no flattening of the curve. Had that been allowed to continue the hospitals would have been overwhelmed throughout the country instead of just in a few areas. The curve has been flattened considerably but the lag is considerable. You seem to not appreciate how dangerous the position is.
NH posts anecdotes that support his belief that it's all a fuss about nothing.
What the one from Matt Hancock yesterday when he said there were more empty beds in the NHS yesterday than at any point in its history?
In a development that runs contrary to the rules of science and technology, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps claims to have invented a device that can detect the presence of coronavirus at a distance of 100 metres, writes Patrick Wintour, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The IRGC, subject to intense US sanctions and seen by Washington as the source of instability across the Middle East, unveiled the device earlier this week at a ceremony hosted by its commander Maj Gen Hossein Salami.
The device “creates a magnetic field, and by using an embedded bipolar virus, any infected area can be detected within a 100-metre radius”, according to the IRGC, which said the process takes under five seconds.
Salami said:
This device does not require blood transfusions and operates remotely and intelligently, i.e. it is used for mass screening and fully detects infected surfaces and people who are infected.
He said it would also act as a smart disinfectant since it would know which areas need disinfecting.
This is an amazing scientific phenomenon, and it has been tested in various hospitals, and it has answered more than 80% of its accuracy, and it will be a very good basis for any kind of virus.
It is fair to say that the device’s unveiling led to a degree of scepticism on social media, with some Iranians saying they did not know whether to laugh or cry.
Separately Babak Shokri, vice-chancellor of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences claimed Iran will be able to market a coronavirus-resistant fabric within a month.
Elizabeth Holmes will be wondering why she didn't think of that.
Personally as long as the non-commercial bits of the BBC continued to be publicly funded in some way - like BBC News for instance, I'd be fine with the rest going to a subscription model.
They aren't publiclly funded now. They are paid for by those that choose to buy a tv license. I and many like me pay nothing towards them. The tv license at this point can be viewed as no more than a yearly sub
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
That's the problem with having (had) a science career. You think that everyone else is prepared to listen to a clear and simple explanation without thinking "shit I can't do science"
Wasn't there around that amount announced yesterday as well?
84 yesterday.
I'd guess it might be catching up from the weekend though (9 and ~26 deaths were reported I think). Scotland has averaged around 50 deaths a day so a couple of days with ~80 deaths would capture the under-reporting from the weekend perhaps?
I see the take-up of routine vaccinations is declining sharply. There is a problem in that the public are increasingly viewing GP surgeries/medical centres as well as hospitals as plague houses.
In a development that runs contrary to the rules of science and technology, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps claims to have invented a device that can detect the presence of coronavirus at a distance of 100 metres, writes Patrick Wintour, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The IRGC, subject to intense US sanctions and seen by Washington as the source of instability across the Middle East, unveiled the device earlier this week at a ceremony hosted by its commander Maj Gen Hossein Salami.
The device “creates a magnetic field, and by using an embedded bipolar virus, any infected area can be detected within a 100-metre radius”, according to the IRGC, which said the process takes under five seconds.
Salami said:
This device does not require blood transfusions and operates remotely and intelligently, i.e. it is used for mass screening and fully detects infected surfaces and people who are infected.
He said it would also act as a smart disinfectant since it would know which areas need disinfecting.
This is an amazing scientific phenomenon, and it has been tested in various hospitals, and it has answered more than 80% of its accuracy, and it will be a very good basis for any kind of virus.
It is fair to say that the device’s unveiling led to a degree of scepticism on social media, with some Iranians saying they did not know whether to laugh or cry.
Separately Babak Shokri, vice-chancellor of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences claimed Iran will be able to market a coronavirus-resistant fabric within a month.
So Iran has either been recently visited by time-travellers who were happy to offer them some advanced scanning technology from the future, or...
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
I missed that particular instance but we do know the rules are too confusing because we have seen the public, the police, and politicians misunderstand them.
It's the advantage of having a scientist as a leader rather than media savvy classicists.
But it is something I would give Boris a lot of credit for. He has never tried to give the billy bullshit on the science side, instead saying here are our two experts, they will now explain the situation. And they have, regularly, and clearly.
Out of interest, does Merkel or Macron do a daily press conference? Because our media demanded our government did, then get bored when nothing is really announced.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
I missed that particular instance but we do know the rules are too confusing because we have seen the public, the police, and politicians misunderstand them.
No, they might claim they are too confusing, but it as an convenient excuse. I didn't know I couldn't go on a 300 miles round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ officer....
The rules are really very simple. And it is why 90 odd percentage of people have had no issue following them.
I wonder how much the justgiving company are going to make from that?
I personally find it all very uncomfortable that there is a business, who makes money out of taking a significant percentage of charity donations. I know they claim most of it is payment processing, but still, I don't like it at all.
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
"US intelligence is reviewing sensitive intelligence collection aimed at the Chinese government, according to the intelligence source, as they pursue the theory. But some intelligence officials say it is possible the actual cause may never be know"
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
If they can prove it to a level satisfactory to even many who would be wary of upsetting the Chinese government I think it would definitely be worth it for them to reveal it.
Possible, but on the evidence so far, unlikely.
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 ....The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
More scientific data could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another. Obtaining related viral sequences from animal sources would be the most definitive way of revealing viral origins. For example, a future observation of an intermediate or fully formed polybasic cleavage site in a SARS-CoV-2-like virus from animals would lend even further support to the natural-selection hypotheses. It would also be helpful to obtain more genetic and functional data about SARS-CoV-2, including animal studies. The identification of a potential intermediate host of SARS-CoV-2, as well as sequencing of the virus from very early cases, would similarly be highly informative. Irrespective of the exact mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 originated via natural selection, the ongoing surveillance of pneumonia in humans and other animals is clearly of utmost importance...
The named authors on this paper carry considerably more weight in their field than "US intelligence".
Complete point-missing. The claim being tested is that a *naturally-evolved* virus escaped from a lab.
Quiz questions: @rcs1000 This was mine from last week. Think carefully before answering. Difficulty: medium QUIZ Questions - not the expected answer
1. Wife and I had Bombay Duck for dinner. What type of animal did we eat? 2. An aeroplane contains a device called a Flight Data Recorder, that is used to help investigate accidents. Commonly known as the Black Box, what colour is it? 3. What is the chemical symbol for the element Potassium? 4. Before the discovery of Mt Everest, what was the world’s tallest mountain? 5. A doctor gives you three pills and says to take one every 30 minutes. How long do they last? 6. According to the world records, the highest speed men’s running race is held over what distance? 7. If you navigate the Suez Canal by boat, how many locks do you have to pass through? 8. Launched in 2008, what was the name given to the second generation iPhone? 9. Write down the number eleven thousand, eleven hundred and eleven 10. Where is the Sea of Tranquility?
Extra Questions 1. What has four eyes and runs 2,000 miles? 2. Who is the Prime Minister of France? 3. Rapper Eminem was in a band called D12. Otherwise known as the Dirty Dozen, how many members did this band have?
TIE BREAKER Airbus A380 - How many people evacuated in 90 seconds for certification test? (plane was full of economy seats).
QUIZ Answers.
1. Fish 2. Orange (or red) 3. K (Po is Polonium, don’t get them confused!) 4. Mt Everest 5. 60 minutes (0m, 30m and 60m) 6. 400m (4x100m relay) 7. None (the Panama Canal is the one with the big locks) 8. iPhone 3G 9. 12,111 (11,111 is 11k *one* hundred and 11) 10. On the Moon
Extras 1. Mississippi 2. Eduard Philippe 3. Six (Each had two names) TIE BREAKER - 873 people!
5 is misleading - arguably the medical effect of the pills lasts 90m, even though you consume the last one at 60m
And what is the harm in getting potassium and polonium confused? You do not want to be swallowing either one of them.
I vaguely recall one of my kids having a potassium deficiency at one point which was causing problems. I think it is one of these things that is essential in small doses. Polonium not so much.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
Time for a game of 'Suggest the ultimate crap journo question on the virus':
"It is obvious now that we locked down far too late, but what the public really want to know is will it end this weekend?"
It is perfectly reasonable to argue that an earlier lock down would have been shorter.
I wonder how much the justgiving company are going to make from that?
5% or so..
Actually that's what it was years ago before VirginGiving kicked them up the backside but it seems a lot more reasonable and the fees are listed at https://www.justgiving.com/info/fees-2019-march
so it's 1.9% + 20p from every transaction (a lot of which will be going to the bank who provides the processing gateway) and 5% of the gift aided reclaim amount.
Not really, the wealthy just game the system by moving into the catchment area of a good state school.
Schools are one factor in where people choose to live. That will always be the case. The question is - if society's most influential people are reliant on a public service, will it act to raise the level of that service?
I wonder how much the justgiving company are going to make from that?
5% or so..
Actually that's what it was years ago before VirginGiving kicked them up the backside but it seems a lot more reasonable and the fees are listed at https://www.justgiving.com/info/fees-2019-march
so it's 1.9% + 20p from every transaction (a lot of which will be going to the bank who provides the processing gateway) and 5% of the gift aided reclaim amount.
So what you are saying, is they used to really take the piss.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
I missed that particular instance but we do know the rules are too confusing because we have seen the public, the police, and politicians misunderstand them.
No, they might claim they are too confusing, but it as an convenient excuse. I didn't know I couldn't go on a 300 miles round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ officer....
The rules are really very simple. And it is why 90 odd percentage of people have had no issue following them.
But - "Can I go on a 301 mile round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ, officer...."
Poor figures from Spain again today more than 5000 new cases and more than 500 new deaths. Still a long way to go.
Is their truly any evidence that lockdowns work or is the virus just following its curve?
The spanish Health service is very good but has come close to collapse this time. Very close indeed. No lockdown would have been a massacre of the people and the service.
Spain has been in a severe lockdown for 34 days, yet there were 5000 new cases yesterday. Italy has been in lockdown for 38 days, yet there were 3000 new cases yesterday.
It may be that without a lockdown the number of cases would have been 100 times higher, but is there any evidence of that?
Well the evidence is there in the fact that the growth in cases pre-lockdown was massively more than it is now with no flattening of the curve. Had that been allowed to continue the hospitals would have been overwhelmed throughout the country instead of just in a few areas. The curve has been flattened considerably but the lag is considerable. You seem to not appreciate how dangerous the position is.
NH posts anecdotes that support his belief that it's all a fuss about nothing.
What the one from Matt Hancock yesterday when he said there were more empty beds in the NHS yesterday than at any point in its history?
So I suppose you conclude from that that we may as well not have bothered with a lockdown
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
I missed that particular instance but we do know the rules are too confusing because we have seen the public, the police, and politicians misunderstand them.
No, they might claim they are too confusing, but it as an convenient excuse. I didn't know I couldn't go on a 300 miles round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ officer....
The rules are really very simple. And it is why 90 odd percentage of people have had no issue following them.
But - "Can I go on a 301 mile round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ, officer...."
But what if I am a freelance journalist and testing to see if the police will in fact enforce this rule....and will they be allowed to pull me over on the motorway?
In a development that runs contrary to the rules of science and technology, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps claims to have invented a device that can detect the presence of coronavirus at a distance of 100 metres, writes Patrick Wintour, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The IRGC, subject to intense US sanctions and seen by Washington as the source of instability across the Middle East, unveiled the device earlier this week at a ceremony hosted by its commander Maj Gen Hossein Salami.
The device “creates a magnetic field, and by using an embedded bipolar virus, any infected area can be detected within a 100-metre radius”, according to the IRGC, which said the process takes under five seconds.
Salami said:
This device does not require blood transfusions and operates remotely and intelligently, i.e. it is used for mass screening and fully detects infected surfaces and people who are infected.
He said it would also act as a smart disinfectant since it would know which areas need disinfecting.
This is an amazing scientific phenomenon, and it has been tested in various hospitals, and it has answered more than 80% of its accuracy, and it will be a very good basis for any kind of virus.
It is fair to say that the device’s unveiling led to a degree of scepticism on social media, with some Iranians saying they did not know whether to laugh or cry.
Separately Babak Shokri, vice-chancellor of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences claimed Iran will be able to market a coronavirus-resistant fabric within a month.
Not really, the wealthy just game the system by moving into the catchment area of a good state school.
Schools are one factor in where people choose to live. That will always be the case. The question is - if society's most influential people are reliant on a public service, will it act to raise the level of that service?
No because they won't be
Shut private schools their kids will be schooled abroad, shut private health firms again they will simply go abroad etc. You will never achieve what you want
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
We could ban all non-national arrivals (USA, Singapore, Australia et al) or we could mandate 14 day self quarantine for ALL arrivals (countries too numerous to mention) - but we've chosen "nothing". Government asleep at the wheel.
I agree with you completely, Mrs Vance. But this is a Conservative Government, and normally for you it can do no wrong.
But are we still catching up nursing home deaths? We seem to have contrived another layer of confusion to an already murky picture here.
The very same murky picture we appear to be completely relying on to determine decisions that will profoundly affect our lives for decades.
But that is really the point. The absolute numbers are a list of individual tragedies but in the overall scheme of things they don't actually matter too much so far as policy is concerned. What is important is the direction of travel and to measure that you need to have a consistent basis of recording (and be satisfied that that element that you are recording is genuinely indicative of the overall situation). If you start mucking about with the basis of recording half way through this becomes much more difficult. You simply don't have a data base upon which to base your decisions.
"US intelligence and national security officials say the United States government is looking into the possibility that the novel coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory rather than a market, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter who caution it is premature to draw any conclusions."
"US intelligence is reviewing sensitive intelligence collection aimed at the Chinese government, according to the intelligence source, as they pursue the theory. But some intelligence officials say it is possible the actual cause may never be know"
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
If they can prove it to a level satisfactory to even many who would be wary of upsetting the Chinese government I think it would definitely be worth it for them to reveal it.
Possible, but on the evidence so far, unlikely.
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 ....The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
More scientific data could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another. Obtaining related viral sequences from animal sources would be the most definitive way of revealing viral origins. For example, a future observation of an intermediate or fully formed polybasic cleavage site in a SARS-CoV-2-like virus from animals would lend even further support to the natural-selection hypotheses. It would also be helpful to obtain more genetic and functional data about SARS-CoV-2, including animal studies. The identification of a potential intermediate host of SARS-CoV-2, as well as sequencing of the virus from very early cases, would similarly be highly informative. Irrespective of the exact mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 originated via natural selection, the ongoing surveillance of pneumonia in humans and other animals is clearly of utmost importance...
The named authors on this paper carry considerably more weight in their field than "US intelligence".
Complete point-missing. The claim being tested is that a *naturally-evolved* virus escaped from a lab.
The hard core conspiracy theorists claim that it was an invented virus.
If it was an accidental escape, then surely the Chinese would have known exactly what it was as soon as it got out, and that doesn't really fit the timelines.
We know that viruses jump species (SARS, MERS, Ebola, HIV, nvCJD), and this is particularly likely where exotic live animals are in close contact with people. The Wuhan wet market fits the bill pretty well.
The Chinese nedd a total ban on these and rigorous enforcement.
Poor figures from Spain again today more than 5000 new cases and more than 500 new deaths. Still a long way to go.
Is their truly any evidence that lockdowns work or is the virus just following its curve?
The spanish Health service is very good but has come close to collapse this time. Very close indeed. No lockdown would have been a massacre of the people and the service.
Spain has been in a severe lockdown for 34 days, yet there were 5000 new cases yesterday. Italy has been in lockdown for 38 days, yet there were 3000 new cases yesterday.
It may be that without a lockdown the number of cases would have been 100 times higher, but is there any evidence of that?
Well the evidence is there in the fact that the growth in cases pre-lockdown was massively more than it is now with no flattening of the curve. Had that been allowed to continue the hospitals would have been overwhelmed throughout the country instead of just in a few areas. The curve has been flattened considerably but the lag is considerable. You seem to not appreciate how dangerous the position is.
NH posts anecdotes that support his belief that it's all a fuss about nothing.
What the one from Matt Hancock yesterday when he said there were more empty beds in the NHS yesterday than at any point in its history?
So I suppose you conclude from that that we may as well not have bothered with a lockdown
Why do you think that? I don't believe it is a fuss about nothing, but did you think that at the peak of the virus spread in the UK that there would be more empty beds in the NHS than at any point in its history?
The Government asked for 20,000 nurses to come out of retirement to help out, yet hospitals are strugling to place their nurses due to lack of patients.
I see the take-up of routine vaccinations is declining sharply. There is a problem in that the public are increasingly viewing GP surgeries/medical centres as well as hospitals as plague houses.
Two problems. First, many GP practices are effectively closed unless you can get through to be triaged.
Second, the NHS and government websites do not actually mention vaccinations as a reason to visit your doctor. I'm guessing this means they were not written by young mums. For instance the NHS site lists as exceptions:
any medical need, including to donate blood, avoid or escape risk of injury or harm, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
I missed that particular instance but we do know the rules are too confusing because we have seen the public, the police, and politicians misunderstand them.
No, they might claim they are too confusing, but it as an convenient excuse. I didn't know I couldn't go on a 300 miles round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ officer....
The rules are really very simple. And it is why 90 odd percentage of people have had no issue following them.
But - "Can I go on a 301 mile round trip to the lake district to have a BBQ, officer...."
But what if I am a freelance journalist and testing to see if the police will in fact enforce this rule....and will they be allowed to pull me over on the motorway?
Then you will shot dead by an armed response officer as a precautionary measure after a risk assessment has been performed. This is for your own safety. and...
Schools are one factor in where people choose to live. That will always be the case. The question is - if society's most influential people are reliant on a public service, will it act to raise the level of that service?
No.
Did the politburo queue up to buy food like the proles?
Instead of designing an elegant system that works well in theory, just pick an ugly one that works well in practice.
I wonder if the government will have the guts and integrity to adopt the only approach to the economic crisis which is both feasible and fair - higher and steeply progressive taxation with a focus on wealth.
If they do I'll be voting Conservative next time, Starmer or no Starmer.
And if they do it I won't be voting Conservative next time, Boris or no Boris
Boris is instinctively a big state spender. This crisis will make him even more so. He is also a social liberal. The Conservative Party won the last election but what follows will probably be unrecognisable to economic or social conservatives. Cheer away because your side won but in many respects a Boris Government is not going to look much different from a Blair one.
Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.
They're all wrong and we're right?
But that really isn't the choice, is it ? We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
Why do people (Other than repatriation) need to fly here during a lockdown ?
Comments
Luddites always think that.
Fundamentally weather forecasting is good because of access to things like the ocean surface buoy data from NOAH. In the US private weather companies don't pay for that data (the government isn't allowed to charge for it) but they then package and sell it.
If the government stopped collecting the data it wouldn't be economic to do it privately.
What had four legs and forty teeth? A crocodile!
What has forty legs and four teeth? The Central Committee of the Communist Party.
Just because a cyclist screwing up may only kill himself and not others is no consolation for those involved in an accident that results in death.
Not even sure where they got 54% from on the variant as no option scored over 50% and as I noted missed options like subscription only altogether of questioning the actual figures were
Good Bad
Lower fee for some 49% 24%
current fee 47% 22%
universal levy 37% 34%
lower fee & sub 34% 38%
current fee & sub 28% 43%
Did it go into the trap?. The one time I attracted some i found them resting outside.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/15/politics/us-intelligence-virus-started-chinese-lab/index.html
Sweden has 1166 recorded COVID cases per million of population, while the UK has 1478 recorded COVID cases per million of population.
Sweden has 118 recorded COVID deaths per million of population, while the UK has 193 recorded COVID deaths per million of population. (Source GitHub/COVID-19/csse_covid_19_data).
All it needs is somebody to touch a plastic or metal surface in the community and you can quite innocently also touch it and then rub your eyes or mouth. Supermarkets are prime transmission vectors.
I did notice in the UK coverage, how many people in parks doing their daily exercises, were going to up metal poles / railings and doing their stretches by holding on to them. I thought that seems incredibly dumb thing to do.
And they can do all those the day after flying in from who knows where.
The Guernsey advice for "self quarantine on arrival" is very clear - you go directly home (no popping to the shops en-route) and shut the door behind you. For 14 days. If you haven't got food at home and no friends to buy it for you the local supermarkets are delivering.
In Singapore the penalties for not complying with a "Stay at Home Notice" are: (a) in the case of a first offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both; and (b) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.
https://www.gov.sg/article/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-stay-home-notice
*Daniel O'Donnell can be substituted.
100% certain the Chinese will know. They have the ability to track everybody, so they will be able to review all the movements etc, and contact trace all the way back.
The question is do foreign security services have good enough intel to find out these communications and if they do find it was a leak from a lab, want to upset the whole apple cart and reveal it.
If transferable vouchers were given to poorer parents, then yes they would also be supplying feedback.
They can leave their homes
i) to go to work, if you can't wfh
ii) shop for essentials,
iii) exercise,
iv) take care of medical needs.
In quarantine you can do none of those.
The end result is more people turning up at A&E with major problems that could have been dealt with as a minor problem by the GP.
https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-019-0406-6
China have repeatedly claimed they stopped doing this, not only do the numbers not add up, even two months ago they performed the worlds first double lung transplant after finding a donor in less than 5 days. Given they have bugger all people on their donor lists, chances of somebody having died on the list with exactly the correct genetics and both lungs in perfect shape (during a CV outbreak) is just not credible.
https://twitter.com/allisonpearson/status/1250728495552045057?s=21
All very well but if it goes on too long there will start to be a "malingering Johnson" feel about proceedings.
I don't see how that is any different to the regular explanations the likes of Witty and Vallance have given at the press conferences. But then straight after that, we get the "but can I have daughter's friends over for a play date", "no", "well these rules are too confusing".
https://mylifeasgraham.blog/2020/04/13/hes-not-the-messiah-hes-just-a-convenient-distraction/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
....The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
More scientific data could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another. Obtaining related viral sequences from animal sources would be the most definitive way of revealing viral origins. For example, a future observation of an intermediate or fully formed polybasic cleavage site in a SARS-CoV-2-like virus from animals would lend even further support to the natural-selection hypotheses. It would also be helpful to obtain more genetic and functional data about SARS-CoV-2, including animal studies. The identification of a potential intermediate host of SARS-CoV-2, as well as sequencing of the virus from very early cases, would similarly be highly informative. Irrespective of the exact mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 originated via natural selection, the ongoing surveillance of pneumonia in humans and other animals is clearly of utmost importance...
The named authors on this paper carry considerably more weight in their field than "US intelligence".
only 699 previously.
Big jump
How often does this dump load on the A&E?
"It is obvious now that we locked down far too late, but what the public really want to know is will it end this weekend?"
Bring back Blair!
In a development that runs contrary to the rules of science and technology, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps claims to have invented a device that can detect the presence of coronavirus at a distance of 100 metres, writes Patrick Wintour, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor.
The IRGC, subject to intense US sanctions and seen by Washington as the source of instability across the Middle East, unveiled the device earlier this week at a ceremony hosted by its commander Maj Gen Hossein Salami.
The device “creates a magnetic field, and by using an embedded bipolar virus, any infected area can be detected within a 100-metre radius”, according to the IRGC, which said the process takes under five seconds.
Salami said:
This device does not require blood transfusions and operates remotely and intelligently, i.e. it is used for mass screening and fully detects infected surfaces and people who are infected.
He said it would also act as a smart disinfectant since it would know which areas need disinfecting.
This is an amazing scientific phenomenon, and it has been tested in various hospitals, and it has answered more than 80% of its accuracy, and it will be a very good basis for any kind of virus.
It is fair to say that the device’s unveiling led to a degree of scepticism on social media, with some Iranians saying they did not know whether to laugh or cry.
Separately Babak Shokri, vice-chancellor of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences claimed Iran will be able to market a coronavirus-resistant fabric within a month.
https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/tomswalkforthenhs
https://twitter.com/SimonMBeard/status/1250459005572571138?s=20
Out of interest, does Merkel or Macron do a daily press conference? Because our media demanded our government did, then get bored when nothing is really announced.
The rules are really very simple. And it is why 90 odd percentage of people have had no issue following them.
so it's 1.9% + 20p from every transaction (a lot of which will be going to the bank who provides the processing gateway) and 5% of the gift aided reclaim amount.
The front row of a Daniel O’Donnell concert.
EDIT long since beaten to it.
Shut private schools their kids will be schooled abroad, shut private health firms again they will simply go abroad etc. You will never achieve what you want
The whole world seems to be changing.
If it was an accidental escape, then surely the Chinese would have known exactly what it was as soon as it got out, and that doesn't really fit the timelines.
We know that viruses jump species (SARS, MERS, Ebola, HIV, nvCJD), and this is particularly likely where exotic live animals are in close contact with people. The Wuhan wet market fits the bill pretty well.
The Chinese nedd a total ban on these and rigorous enforcement.
I don't believe it is a fuss about nothing, but did you think that at the peak of the virus spread in the UK that there would be more empty beds in the NHS than at any point in its history?
The Government asked for 20,000 nurses to come out of retirement to help out, yet hospitals are strugling to place their nurses due to lack of patients.
These are not anecdotes, these are facts.
Second, the NHS and government websites do not actually mention vaccinations as a reason to visit your doctor. I'm guessing this means they were not written by young mums. For instance the NHS site lists as exceptions: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/
For The Greater Good.
Did the politburo queue up to buy food like the proles?
Instead of designing an elegant system that works well in theory, just pick an ugly one that works well in practice.