I think the people in this country have had enough of experts with organisations from acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong.
Yes, very amusing, but what about a 'rival SAGE Committee' helps? Pretty sure experts have given their views on these matters before.
They can say well look at the numbers, our absolute death numbers are really bad. Ditto compare our cumulative number of tests to say Germany who are really good at this.
Not an answer to the question. People, including scientists, have already said that. Why say it again in this form? What about it is more effective in getting out their message, without confusing matters?
Nothing about a rival SAGE committee helps.
I'm just trying to explain why it is happening, you make a big thing about experts who get it wrong and this is what happens.
When we said we'd had enough of experts, the answer shouldn't have been to have twice as many...
That is based on what my running watch tells me... I run 30-40 miles a week and it tends to elevate your metabolic rate when you're not running. As well as the calorific burn, the body has to do repair and maintenance. And I try to get out for a walk on non-running days and (used to) go to the gym. But yes it provides a good cushion to eat well and have a few pints
That's a fair old distance to pack into one week - are you consistently doing ten milers?
Thats why I like the gym. There are Other People. I don't know who they are but there's always that bit of eyeball to eyeball when tired that makes you do more. So a 5k run then onto the rower or the bike or the bloody stair climbing machine. Followed by the hydro pool or steam room if something is aching.
I miss the gym.
I found it so much of a faff - 15 minutes to get there, 5 minutes to get changed, 45 minute workout, then a 5 minute shower, 5 minute to get changed, 15 minutes back. So 45m faff for a 45 minute working.
With the peloton there is no travel, no faff, and I'm still motivated.
Have gone from doing 20m classes to 45m classes in a month. I feel so much fitter. BMI says I'm not overweight, but I'm a stone heavier than when I left Uni 12 years ago, and I feel it.
I'm having similar thoughts about the sheer faff of the gym since it shut and I was forced to start going out running. The workout now begins and ends at home, which is an immense saving of time given that I'm a non-motorist and had to walk across town to the leisure centre, so that was a full three quarters of an hour in terms of the round trip to add on to all the time I spent there (as against not much more than an hour in total now to change, run 10K and have a good stretch and shower off afterwards.) Walking there, changing, moving between pieces of equipment with other people constantly in the bloody way the whole time, showering, changing again, trudging back... and it's a custom-built breeding ground for the Plague of course, so I don't think I'd consider going back until the thing is well and truly squashed. I might not even bother full stop.
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
Come to the dark side of the Farce, my friend and we'll have you wagering on sellers at Southwell and novice chases at Newton Abbot before long.
Most honours are given on ministerial advice and candidates have to be vetted by the honours scrutiny committee, that's presumably why he will have to wait 'til June.
But can't the Queen hand out a KCVO or even a GCVO off her own bat, without asking the government?
The Garter is her personal one
Good to know she hasn't resorted to borrowing them.
Piers Morgan @piersmorgan · 11m UPDATE: On medical advice, and out of an abundance of caution for a mild symptom that arose in past 48hrs, I’ve had a test for COVID-19 and so won’t be working on @GMB until I get the result back, which should be tomorrow.
Hot, sweaty and shortage of breath....i reckon if his outbursts on GMB are anything to go by, it has more to do with the state of constant outrage he is in.
Not sure you should be first in the queue when it comes to accusations of constant outrage.
One thing is for certain the media will hang on every word this rival lot say. They will be the word of god, especially if they disagree with the government scentists.
Its turns it into politics, and the whole point of Witty and Vallance is to take politics out of it.
I do not understand what they want to achieve to be honest
If they say they want to feed their ideas into sage then fine
But if as I suspect, they are out to damage sage and undermine the present efforts that is extremely dangerous sowing doubts and confusion amongst the populace
They seem to want to make it a political issue which us unacceptable at this critical time.
They will de facto be attacking not only sage and HMG but also Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster for the devolved adminstration who have been involved all along
It will be interesting how Starmer plays this as he must see the danger, especially if they want to compromise Witty and Vallance
I would just add I am not at all sure the public will be impressed as they are likely to be somewhat disturbed by this development, they want clarity not more confusion
Re basal metabolic rate: for a few years it was on the GCSE Physics syllabus. I used to tell my students that the resting rate was for just sitting there not doing anything, not even digesting food. Sitting watching TV produces a LOWER rate...
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle means you can't sit still. HTH.
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
Come to the dark side of the Farce, my friend and we'll have you wagering on sellers at Southwell and novice chases at Newton Abbot before long.
Piers Morgan @piersmorgan · 11m UPDATE: On medical advice, and out of an abundance of caution for a mild symptom that arose in past 48hrs, I’ve had a test for COVID-19 and so won’t be working on @GMB until I get the result back, which should be tomorrow.
No rush, Piers....
He fills a useful niche, I suspect. He is Piers Morgan so none of us have to be.
I don't really see what this is intended to accomplish. Scientific views will not be unanimous, and political responses to any advice will not be unanimous, and we already know there are plenty of people, scientific and otherwise, who take different views from both the government and its advisers, here and in other countries, some of who have taken different measures. How does a 'rival' committee produce any further clarity of approach, or additional weight that should be given to a particular view?
They are going to livestream that they disagree with the current position. Did we not know people, including eminent people, disagree?
They think styling themselves as an alternative committee will make them sound more authoritative. It's reminiscent of the IEA's Shadow Monetary Policy Committee.
I think the people in this country have had enough of experts with organisations from acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong.
Yes, very amusing, but what about a 'rival SAGE Committee' helps? Pretty sure experts have given their views on these matters before.
It's one symptom of governing by briefings, anonymous sources, press headlines etc. If we're in a constant fever of speculation about how much unelected Dom is controlling government policy, we end up with any old shit goes.
Re basal metabolic rate: for a few years it was on the GCSE Physics syllabus. I used to tell my students that the resting rate was for just sitting there not doing anything, not even digesting food. Sitting watching TV produces a LOWER rate...
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle means you can't sit still. HTH.
Yes you can; just only if no-one knows where you're sitting.
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
My understanding is that F1 are trying to solve the problem by isolating everyone within quarantine zones, saturating bombing them with testing, and holding more than one race at each location. There have been noises about two Austrian GPs and two British GPs after that.
Beyond that, it's a product of how much contact is involved in these sports, and whether they've got the money to create quarantined zones with testing for the players and officials, and the money needed to manage without the spectators. County cricket, the entirety of club rugby, and the entirety of football below the top two divisions have probably all had it; individual sports might be able to engineer work-arounds, and indeed some of them are already advancing plans.
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
Come to the dark side of the Farce, my friend and we'll have you wagering on sellers at Southwell and novice chases at Newton Abbot before long.
I've been to York races a few times, enjoyed it.
Was meant to be going there for the first time in a few years next month. Needless to say the trip has long since been cancelled.
The Ebor Festival in August would presumably be one of the candidates to be saved if the BHA can get all its ducks in a row, but I don't imagine we'll be seeing spectators at racing again this year, anymore than we will at football matches.
I have been banging on about our rubbish level of testing for a couple of months and we are still miles behind all the other major players in this.
World's 50 largest economies, tests per day per thousand population, rolling 3 day average.
Denmark 1.8 Belgium 1.8 UK 1.5 France 1.5 <--- a guess, but probably same as us (they've expanded very rapidly the last week and were also aiming at 100k/day) Portugal 1.5 Russia 1.4 Italy 1.1 New Zealand 1.1 Peru 1.0 Spain 1.0 Israel 1.0 Canada 0.8 US 0.8 Germany 0.8 Australia 0.8 Austria 0.7 Turkey 0.5 Czechs 0.5 Norway 0.5 Finland 0.5 Chile 0.5 Romania 0.4 Switzerland 0.3 Poland 0.3 Netherlands 0.3 Sweden 0.3 <---- guess, but their announced totals are same as Netherlands Malaysia 0.2 S Africa 0.2 Iran 0.1 Japan 0.1 S Korea 0.1 Colombia 0.1 India 0.04 Argentina 0.04 Pakistan 0.04 Thailand 0.04 Philippines 0.04 Bangladesh 0.03 Indonesia 0.01 Mexico 0.01
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
Come to the dark side of the Farce, my friend and we'll have you wagering on sellers at Southwell and novice chases at Newton Abbot before long.
I've been to York races a few times, enjoyed it.
Neither Southwell nor Newton Abbot is York. There is a difference.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect except use as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect •except use* as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
I agree. This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off. It's in Trump territory. Fake news<--->fake science.
We've heard this in South Africa, Germany, Ireland and elsewhere. "Positive meetings" mean nothing if the Government advice actively excludes it happening quickly.
I've come to the acceptance the sports I really love*, cricket and football will not have fans there until we have a vaccine.
*I love rugby union and F1 but I don't go to those that often.
I think F1 and sports that involve lots of international travel are buggered .
Come to the dark side of the Farce, my friend and we'll have you wagering on sellers at Southwell and novice chases at Newton Abbot before long.
I've been to York races a few times, enjoyed it.
Neither Southwell nor Newton Abbot is York. There is a difference.
You're kidding?
I never knew that York isn't Southwell nor Newton Abbott.
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
I agree. This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off. It's in Trump territory. Fake news<--->fake science.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect •except use* as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
*exercise
Boxing is by far the best fitness activity imo. A bit like swimming in that you can think you are very fit but if you try 3x3 or alternatively 4 lengths front crawl you are pretty much f****d unless you have been training for some time to do either.
Re basal metabolic rate: for a few years it was on the GCSE Physics syllabus. I used to tell my students that the resting rate was for just sitting there not doing anything, not even digesting food. Sitting watching TV produces a LOWER rate...
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
I agree. This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off. It's in Trump territory. Fake news<--->fake science.
I'm struggling to see what the objection is.
They wont have access to the data that SAGE has for starters, it's like trying have an orgy on your own.
If you are unfit, go for a run and/or a bike ride. There is no need to spend silly money on ‘home gyms’ at this time of year. Find your nearest trails and shoot the breeze. Enjoy your own country.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect •except use* as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
*exercise
Boxing is by far the best fitness activity imo. A bit like swimming in that you can think you are very fit but if you try 3x3 or alternatively 4 lengths front crawl you are pretty much f****d unless you have been training for some time to do either.
Boxing training, in its fullest sense, is extremely good because its working a whole series of parameters, there are aerobic and anaerobic components, high intensity elements, pure strength work, muscle endurance and so on. It mixes the activities so provides great all round fitness test.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect •except use* as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
*exercise
Boxing is by far the best fitness activity imo. A bit like swimming in that you can think you are very fit but if you try 3x3 or alternatively 4 lengths front crawl you are pretty much f****d unless you have been training for some time to do either.
Boxing training, in its fullest sense, is extremely good because its working a whole series of parameters, there are aerobic and anaerobic components, high intensity elements, pure strength work, muscle endurance and so on. It mixes the activities so provides great all round fitness test.
Plus some bloke is trying to club you round the head which I have always found focuses the mind greatly.
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
I agree. This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off. It's in Trump territory. Fake news<--->fake science.
I'm struggling to see what the objection is.
The SAGE group is an independent apolitical group giving neutral scientific advice.
This "rival" group is entirely political giving advice based on the fact they disagree with either the advice of the real group or the politics of the government.
Not the same thing, not appropriate. If they wish to say they disagree then say so under their own names - not the name SAGE which means something.
If you are unfit, go for a run and/or a bike ride. There is no need to spend silly money on ‘home gyms’ at this time of year. Find your nearest trails and shoot the breeze. Enjoy your own country.
Also very practical if you don't have room for massive torture contraptions, which most of us don't.
Bamboo and Mint, clearance of. Over the last couple of years this raised bed has been left mainly to mint, bamboo and pots. How can this be recovered for veg?
1. Do you want to keep the mint and bamboo? If so carefully dig them out and replant. ALWAYS ALWAYS plant mint in a pot because it is a thug in the ground and will take over. But a great herb to have.
2. On bamboo either plant in a very big pot or plant into the ground but put a barrier around the roots so it cannot spread. The simplest way to do this is:-
(a) Dig a trench around where you are going to put the bamboo. (b) Before putting it in trim it’s roots and cut off any rhizomes which are heading horizontally since that is how it spreads. (c) Put a plastic barrier - a plastic roll which you cut to size - in the trench all the way round the trench. (d) Plant the bamboo then fill in the trench. So your bamboo is in effect in a pot in the aground and cannot spread. (e) If you see any bamboo shoots appearing outside its designated area, be ruthless and dig them out. the roots.
3. Remove all roots and weeds and much of the compost which will need refreshing with new compost (peat free). Plant your veg plugs or seeds.
I am very concerned about this stunt of having this committee. It stinks of playing politics, but it will has potential for causing public confusion.
What happens if they start recommending lifting the lockdown, and the public hear SAGE, lockdown lifted....
potential is an understatement
It is an astonishingly irresponsible idea. Anybody taking part should be ashamed of themselves. Scientists and scientific groups can comment freely and their views will have an impact according to their merit and their credibility. This stunt is absolutely disgusting, no doubt fuelled by egotism and ideological dislike of the government.
I agree. This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off. It's in Trump territory. Fake news<--->fake science.
I'm struggling to see what the objection is.
Well, this IS the Telegraph, so I await further information. I'd be content if the rival committee comprises serious scientists and not tendentious politicians.
Piers Morgan @piersmorgan · 11m UPDATE: On medical advice, and out of an abundance of caution for a mild symptom that arose in past 48hrs, I’ve had a test for COVID-19 and so won’t be working on @GMB until I get the result back, which should be tomorrow.
No rush, Piers....
He fills a useful niche, I suspect. He is Piers Morgan so none of us have to be.
I don't really see what this is intended to accomplish. Scientific views will not be unanimous, and political responses to any advice will not be unanimous, and we already know there are plenty of people, scientific and otherwise, who take different views from both the government and its advisers, here and in other countries, some of who have taken different measures. How does a 'rival' committee produce any further clarity of approach, or additional weight that should be given to a particular view?
They are going to livestream that they disagree with the current position. Did we not know people, including eminent people, disagree?
It is intended to achieve undermining the Government official position and hopefully (as far as they are concerned) making political capital out of the epidemic. It can and will serve no other purpose. ,
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
I think to lose weight if you’re fat you’re best off doing cardio. Boxing training is almost the perfect •except use* as it does combine both, but if you only do weights your a fat bloke with some muscles somewhere underneath
*exercise
Boxing is by far the best fitness activity imo. A bit like swimming in that you can think you are very fit but if you try 3x3 or alternatively 4 lengths front crawl you are pretty much f****d unless you have been training for some time to do either.
Boxing training, in its fullest sense, is extremely good because its working a whole series of parameters, there are aerobic and anaerobic components, high intensity elements, pure strength work, muscle endurance and so on. It mixes the activities so provides great all round fitness test.
If you are unfit, go for a run and/or a bike ride. There is no need to spend silly money on ‘home gyms’ at this time of year. Find your nearest trails and shoot the breeze. Enjoy your own country.
Or a brisk walk. I did a 2-hour walk yesterday and a 30 minute one today. Otherwise it’s a rowing machine and ping pong for me.
Plus Daughter does not buy me snacks. So am eating very healthily.
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
I'd love to taste a fresh-picked pineapple and banana, but I wouldn't fly to do so. But we do have fresh picked apples and cherries (not to mention vegetables too) , so that's pretty good.
It's clearly a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
There was a matter of the Stereophonics playing 2 in door gigs, 5,000, at the Cardiff Arena on the 2nd weekend of March.....
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
There are hardly any cases and ergo deaths for the simple reason nobody lives there.
Admittedly, even allowing for that they have a higher rate per capita (9/132000) than Cardiff and the Vale (181/445,000). It looks as though they’re doing something right even if some idiots are commuting back and forth to London to count Tube trains.
It's clearly a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
There was a matter of the Stereophonics playing 2 in door gigs, 5,000, at the Cardiff Arena on the 2nd weekend of March.....
I couldn't believe it when i saw that. I had tickets to a gig in that run up to lockdown and there was absolutely no chance i was going to stand in a room with a few 1000 sweaty people all bashing into one another.
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
It would be interesting to see the same chart for Scotland to compare
It's clearly a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
There was a matter of the Stereophonics playing 2 in door gigs, 5,000, at the Cardiff Arena on the 2nd weekend of March.....
I couldn't believe it when i saw that. I had tickets to a gig in that run up to lockdown and there was absolutely no chance i was going to stand in a room with a few 1000 sweaty people all bashing into one another.
The images of the Stereophonics Gig were the most shared in China the following week....
Similarly Bergamo...was the result of Atlanta's fans travelling to the San Siro vs Valencia towards the end of Feb....
I repeat, let the fat fucks die. I see no reason why we should ruin the economy to save the worthless, greedy, swinish lives of people who can’t resist that TENTH doughnut
We have tolerated their unsightly lifestyles too long. Now there’s a virus to sort them out. We should let it do its cleansing, Darwinian work.
I am sorry to disappoint you @eadric but the latest ICNARC study of on the first 7542 UK patients critically ill with COVID-19 seems to show that such patients have pretty much the same BMI spread as the country at large.
A high BMI does not seem to make you markedly more susceptible to needing ICU support (see figure 9 on page 10 of the report).
Furthermore your chances of surving ICU remain within a few percent of 50% regardless of your BMI (table 8 on page 19)
This as this origin of the virus story is going to gather some wind behind it. The US government is becoming more strident that it came from a lab but some things to note:
1. I've seen a report from the US that there is reasonable concurrence amongst the 17 US intelligence agencies that its origin was in a lab. In reality there are a handful of agencies that actually would have any on the spot focus on such matters in terms of intelligence take and analysis; CIA, NSA, NRO, NGA & DIA The rest probably do not count because they are probably not involved in the original raw take or analysis of it.
2. For clarity, the Wuhan facility were mixing viral components together, its no secret and never hidden. That in itself is not necessarily a smoking gun but if its mentioned as a claim to suggest something sinister, its not a revelation. Maybe it is sinister work, maybe it isn't.
3. Its viable, probable even, China lied its arse off about Sars CoV 2 in particular around its knowledge of it, the timelines and potentially information around its nature,severity and casualty rate, especially early on in proceedings. The follow up weird and wonderful disinformation is deflection but for what purpose. Plain embarrassment or something more calculated and worrisome?
4. As yet no one with any authority claims it was a deliberately engineered release and as yet no one has quite yer stepped up to say it was created 100% artificially even if done in the course of medical research.
5. The process of ramp up of claims & pressure from the US (and perhaps more notably from Australian officials who are very aware of China upstream) is only likely to be calibrated such for three reasons:
a). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge and are progressively going to embarrass China and eventually release take.
b). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge but are possibly reluctant to reveal the take (which they may have to)
c). They have plenty of fragments but cant quite put it together so are stirring the pot.
I'd refer to any decent story sourcing that refers to the Aussies with due attention. Their investment in monitoring China is as proportionally sizeable as anyone.
The above doesn't refer to political side of this. Its pretty clear how the current administration could and will use the situation but it shouldn't take away from the questions about exactly how China handled the whole situation.
Pizze are so last week. This weekend has been about banana bread, and duck with goat’s cheese, strawberries and asparagus.
Just looking at the percentages on the traffic light thingys on pizza boxes is enough to put me off. Theyre definitely best left as a treat if you’re dining out
This as this origin of the virus story is going to gather some wind behind it. The US government is becoming more strident that it came from a lab but some things to note:
1. I've seen a report from the US that there is reasonable concurrence amongst the 17 US intelligence agencies that its origin was in a lab. In reality there are a handful of agencies that actually would have any on the spot focus on such matters in terms of intelligence take and analysis; CIA, NSA, NRO, NGA & DIA The rest probably do not count because they are probably not involved in the original raw take or analysis of it.
2. For clarity, the Wuhan facility were mixing viral components together, its no secret and never hidden. That in itself is not necessarily a smoking gun but if its mentioned as a claim to suggest something sinister, its not a revelation. Maybe it is sinister work, maybe it isn't.
3. Its viable, probable even, China lied its arse off about Sars CoV 2 in particular around its knowledge of it, the timelines and potentially information around its nature,severity and casualty rate, especially early on in proceedings. The follow up weird and wonderful disinformation is deflection but for what purpose. Plain embarrassment or something more calculated and worrisome?
4. As yet no one with any authority claims it was a deliberately engineered release and as yet no one has quite yer stepped up to say it was created 100% artificially even if done in the course of medical research.
5. The process of ramp up of claims & pressure from the US (and perhaps more notably from Australian officials who are very aware of China upstream) is only likely to be calibrated such for three reasons:
a). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge and are progressively going to embarrass China and eventually release take.
b). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge but are possibly reluctant to reveal the take (which they may have to)
c). They have plenty of fragments but cant quite put it together so are stirring the pot.
I'd refer to any decent story sourcing that refers to the Aussies with due attention. Their investment in monitoring China is as proportionally sizeable as anyone.
The above doesn't refer to political side of this. Its pretty clear how the current administration could and will use the situation but it shouldn't take away from the questions about exactly how China handled the whole situation.
Isn't the drop in tests at the weekend going to be a long term issue because since a lot of them are posted out and Royal Mail have stopped the Saturday service and there's not a Sunday service?
Last excuse was it was so good because it was Amazon, now it is so bad because it is Royal Mail
I haven't moved from my computer since lockdown started and I've lost 100 pounds on online poker.
I've been considered getting back into online poker. There must be a surge of fish rushing to the tables to relieve lockdown boredom.
I wonder of there are PL Omaha HiLo games these days.
This works both ways: some of the people coming back in aren't fish. But I think you're probably right that the overall quality level has dropped.
SkyBet used to have PL Omaha HiLo tables, although I don't think they were ever as popular as HoldEm, and I haven't been round that way in a while.
The joy og the PLOHL tables back in the day was the idiots who thought they could play not only could they play Oamaha HL but that they understood how PL worked.
Playing PLOHL with good players would be a sure fire route to misery. Only playing Limit Omaha HL would be worse
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
It would be interesting to see the same chart for Scotland to compare
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
It would be interesting to see the same chart for Scotland to compare
It looks like a case of population density + poor health. It's not age per se, because the Montgomeryshire and Brecon&Radnor areas have the oldest populations AFAIK.
It would be interesting to see the same chart for Scotland to compare
Comments
If they say they want to feed their ideas into sage then fine
But if as I suspect, they are out to damage sage and undermine the present efforts that is extremely dangerous sowing doubts and confusion amongst the populace
They seem to want to make it a political issue which us unacceptable at this critical time.
They will de facto be attacking not only sage and HMG but also Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster for the devolved adminstration who have been involved all along
It will be interesting how Starmer plays this as he must see the danger, especially if they want to compromise Witty and Vallance
I would just add I am not at all sure the public will be impressed as they are likely to be somewhat disturbed by this development, they want clarity not more confusion
https://www.twitter.com/danielleofri/status/1256939885094633478?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Beyond that, it's a product of how much contact is involved in these sports, and whether they've got the money to create quarantined zones with testing for the players and officials, and the money needed to manage without the spectators. County cricket, the entirety of club rugby, and the entirety of football below the top two divisions have probably all had it; individual sports might be able to engineer work-arounds, and indeed some of them are already advancing plans.
The Ebor Festival in August would presumably be one of the candidates to be saved if the BHA can get all its ducks in a row, but I don't imagine we'll be seeing spectators at racing again this year, anymore than we will at football matches.
Denmark 1.8
Belgium 1.8
UK 1.5
France 1.5 <--- a guess, but probably same as us (they've expanded very rapidly the last week and were also aiming at 100k/day)
Portugal 1.5
Russia 1.4
Italy 1.1
New Zealand 1.1
Peru 1.0
Spain 1.0
Israel 1.0
Canada 0.8
US 0.8
Germany 0.8
Australia 0.8
Austria 0.7
Turkey 0.5
Czechs 0.5
Norway 0.5
Finland 0.5
Chile 0.5
Romania 0.4
Switzerland 0.3
Poland 0.3
Netherlands 0.3
Sweden 0.3 <---- guess, but their announced totals are same as Netherlands
Malaysia 0.2
S Africa 0.2
Iran 0.1
Japan 0.1
S Korea 0.1
Colombia 0.1
India 0.04
Argentina 0.04
Pakistan 0.04
Thailand 0.04
Philippines 0.04
Bangladesh 0.03
Indonesia 0.01
Mexico 0.01
China/Brazil/Saudis/UAE/Nigeria/HK/Ireland/Singapore/Egypt/Vietnam couldn't find.
This stunt. Pisses. Me. Off.
It's in Trump territory.
Fake news<--->fake science.
I never knew that York isn't Southwell nor Newton Abbott.
I've just seen footage of pickles on pizzas.
Probably.
https://twitter.com/honeykwani/status/1255703620428988417
What's the end of lockdown equivalent of a bucket list?
I mean I love pineapples, just not on pizzas.
This "rival" group is entirely political giving advice based on the fact they disagree with either the advice of the real group or the politics of the government.
Not the same thing, not appropriate. If they wish to say they disagree then say so under their own names - not the name SAGE which means something.
Had baked beans on a pizza last night, was my daughter's choice what went on hers and she chose baked beans. It worked.
Edit: and no I'm not in Penarth.
I am not a fan of bamboo I must say. Anyway:-
1. Do you want to keep the mint and bamboo? If so carefully dig them out and replant. ALWAYS ALWAYS plant mint in a pot because it is a thug in the ground and will take over. But a great herb to have.
2. On bamboo either plant in a very big pot or plant into the ground but put a barrier around the roots so it cannot spread. The simplest way to do this is:-
(a) Dig a trench around where you are going to put the bamboo.
(b) Before putting it in trim it’s roots and cut off any rhizomes which are heading horizontally since that is how it spreads.
(c) Put a plastic barrier - a plastic roll which you cut to size - in the trench all the way round the trench.
(d) Plant the bamboo then fill in the trench. So your bamboo is in effect in a pot in the aground and cannot spread.
(e) If you see any bamboo shoots appearing outside its designated area, be ruthless and dig them out. the roots.
3. Remove all roots and weeds and much of the compost which will need refreshing with new compost (peat free). Plant your veg plugs or seeds.
0715 tomorrow. Yatsenko v Hudushyn. Yatsenko has won last 5 meetings 3-1, 3-1, 3-0 ,3-1, 3-0. Bet365 are 4/1. Or 4/7 +2.5 games on the handicap.
No need for horse racing with 100+ Ukrainian and Russian table tennis matches to go out each day.
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1257036341860237312?s=20
https://twitter.com/BBCWalesNews/status/1256948001043611651?s=09
Plus Daughter does not buy me snacks. So am eating very healthily.
But we do have fresh picked apples and cherries (not to mention vegetables too) , so that's pretty good.
Admittedly, even allowing for that they have a higher rate per capita (9/132000) than Cardiff and the Vale (181/445,000). It looks as though they’re doing something right even if some idiots are commuting back and forth to London to count Tube trains.
Similarly Bergamo...was the result of Atlanta's fans travelling to the San Siro vs Valencia towards the end of Feb....
A high BMI does not seem to make you markedly more susceptible to needing ICU support (see figure 9 on page 10 of the report).
Furthermore your chances of surving ICU remain within a few percent of 50% regardless of your BMI (table 8 on page 19)
https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/f48efee2-d38b-ea11-9125-00505601089b
This as this origin of the virus story is going to gather some wind behind it. The US government is becoming more strident that it came from a lab but some things to note:
1. I've seen a report from the US that there is reasonable concurrence amongst the 17 US intelligence agencies that its origin was in a lab. In reality there are a handful of agencies that actually would have any on the spot focus on such matters in terms of intelligence take and analysis; CIA, NSA, NRO, NGA & DIA The rest probably do not count because they are probably not involved in the original raw take or analysis of it.
2. For clarity, the Wuhan facility were mixing viral components together, its no secret and never hidden. That in itself is not necessarily a smoking gun but if its mentioned as a claim to suggest something sinister, its not a revelation. Maybe it is sinister work, maybe it isn't.
3. Its viable, probable even, China lied its arse off about Sars CoV 2 in particular around its knowledge of it, the timelines and potentially information around its nature,severity and casualty rate, especially early on in proceedings. The follow up weird and wonderful disinformation is deflection but for what purpose. Plain embarrassment or something more calculated and worrisome?
4. As yet no one with any authority claims it was a deliberately engineered release and as yet no one has quite yer stepped up to say it was created 100% artificially even if done in the course of medical research.
5. The process of ramp up of claims & pressure from the US (and perhaps more notably from Australian officials who are very aware of China upstream) is only likely to be calibrated such for three reasons:
a). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge and are progressively going to embarrass China and eventually release take.
b). They are pushing from a position of considerable knowledge but are possibly reluctant to reveal the take (which they may have to)
c). They have plenty of fragments but cant quite put it together so are stirring the pot.
I'd refer to any decent story sourcing that refers to the Aussies with due attention. Their investment in monitoring China is as proportionally sizeable as anyone.
The above doesn't refer to political side of this. Its pretty clear how the current administration could and will use the situation but it shouldn't take away from the questions about exactly how China handled the whole situation.
Good to see HMG working with business and the unions
Playing PLOHL with good players would be a sure fire route to misery. Only playing Limit Omaha HL would be worse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgIg90cFRVw
And that new deaths by day line is stubbornly refusing to bend down.
Seems a similar pattern to population density and poorer communities, maybe