"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The Conservative Party has a majority. That is not the same as Johnson/Gove/Cummings having a majority.
Last week you lot were saying polls don't matter because an election is 5 years away. Can't have it both ways. Boris knows keeping Dom is more important than any poll right now.
Very easily. A few days before the GE, the stupid 'photogate' story (another Mirror smear-job) caused a wave of outrage that was captured in the final YouGov MRP, causing the predicted majority to fall to 28, and for people like you (and you specifically) to imagine that Corbyn was on his way to victory.
A few days days later, people forgot their outrage, and we landslided you anyway.
That was after about four days. There are now four years until the next election.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
I thought he managed his speech very well, but there were times during questions where he was struggling not to snap.
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
To be fair to the PM, the change of policy was always going to be this week, with start of June the target date for the implementation.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
I don't see any evidence in the data that the 'unlocking' already made around the world has led to any statistical uptick in case numbers in those countries that are well clear of their peaks. If this continues, pressure to move more quickly will only grow.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
That's true - to control spread you need to identify those [people|actions] that spread the most. But R isn't supposed to do that, it's a measure of the overall situation and the lumpiness is irrelevant for that. If R > 1 then trouble ahead (how quickly depending how much > 1). If R < 1 then things are going to get better.
R is a useful measure of what it measures. It might be that R doesn't do what you'd like it to do. It's a bit like saying GDP growth figures are useless to assess the economy because even in a recession there are some people making fortunes.
But getting the R number down is all about controlling the super spreaders and really pretty irrelevant to what the rest of us do. It is not a justification for the current regulations.
You have half of a point about current regulations, but...
It is absolutely a justification for no relaxation on the rules over self-isolation if showing symptoms of respiratory infection. That will not change until the pandemic risk is entirely over.
And it's not irrelevant to what the rest of us do - going back into crowded pubs, for example.
Also - as I understand it, "super spreader" is not a uniquely genetic thing where someone in particular is mysteriously more effective at spreading the disease than everyone else. It's down to circumstance and environment, as well as number of contacts available. It's more super-spreader events rather than super-spreader individuals.
You know, like breaking quarantine and ending up at Durham hospital while infectious, just before a big spike in infections around Durham hospital.
To prevent super-spreader events - which are ones we can only recognise in retrospect - we've got to follow the current rules.
I think we can safely determine the following superspreader locations - Nightclubs and churches. Two places where people sing & shout vigorously.
Very true. Indications seem to be that anywhere you spend indoors for a prolonged period with a number of other people, especially where the air is being recirculated, is also a more risky situation for these.
Outside tables separated by 2m+ and with only members of the same household at each table would look to be feasible for food/drinks as long as the surfaces are carefully wiped down and people get their own food and drink from a given location (thinking about the hospitality front).
Busy bars are definitely still a no-no, of course.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
I thought he managed his speech very well, but there were times during questions where he was struggling not to snap.
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
To be fair to the PM, the change of policy was always going to be this week, with start of June the target date for the implementation.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
I don't see any evidence in the data that the 'unlocking' already made around the world has led to any statistical uptick in case numbers in those countries that are well clear of their peaks. If this continues, pressure to move more quickly will only grow.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
That's true - to control spread you need to identify those [people|actions] that spread the most. But R isn't supposed to do that, it's a measure of the overall situation and the lumpiness is irrelevant for that. If R > 1 then trouble ahead (how quickly depending how much > 1). If R < 1 then things are going to get better.
R is a useful measure of what it measures. It might be that R doesn't do what you'd like it to do. It's a bit like saying GDP growth figures are useless to assess the economy because even in a recession there are some people making fortunes.
But getting the R number down is all about controlling the super spreaders and really pretty irrelevant to what the rest of us do. It is not a justification for the current regulations.
You have half of a point about current regulations, but...
It is absolutely a justification for no relaxation on the rules over self-isolation if showing symptoms of respiratory infection. That will not change until the pandemic risk is entirely over.
And it's not irrelevant to what the rest of us do - going back into crowded pubs, for example.
Also - as I understand it, "super spreader" is not a uniquely genetic thing where someone in particular is mysteriously more effective at spreading the disease than everyone else. It's down to circumstance and environment, as well as number of contacts available. It's more super-spreader events rather than super-spreader individuals.
You know, like breaking quarantine and ending up at Durham hospital while infectious, just before a big spike in infections around Durham hospital.
To prevent super-spreader events - which are ones we can only recognise in retrospect - we've got to follow the current rules.
I think we can safely determine the following superspreader locations - Nightclubs and churches. Two places where people sing & shout vigorously.
Worrying for pubs.
I had to pop into a Wetherspoons shortly before lockdown whilst in town (I don't have the bladders Cummings' family do) there was definitely plenty of potential virus spreading activity going on there.
What would be really worrying is if the virus changes behaviour during the asymptomatic but infective period to make people more prone to go and drink at (e.g.) (edit) Spoons and sing very loudly, cf. toxoplasmosis in mammals makes rats more likely to be caught by cats and spread the bug around its cycle.
Last week you lot were saying polls don't matter because an election is 5 years away. Can't have it both ways. Boris knows keeping Dom is more important than any poll right now.
Why do you think that is?
Because Dom is a valued team member and Boris will be judged in 4 years by how the governmen performed over its term of office not fripperies like this.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
Last week you lot were saying polls don't matter because an election is 5 years away. Can't have it both ways. Boris knows keeping Dom is more important than any poll right now.
I never said polls don't matter, please do not put words in my mouth
Just as well they don't given how you were spinning them prior to the 80 seat majority election.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The Conservative Party has a majority. That is not the same as Johnson/Gove/Cummings having a majority.
As long as Johnson/Gove/Cummings have the confidence of the Conservative Party it is.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
I tried to ignore the commentary on here, and watched Dom’s testimony last night.
A strong performance, and the story he offered up was at least consistent. It’s enough to stop the fire.
According to the women watching with me he was struggling to hold back his anger at times, but I didn’t see that especially.
However, I didn’t believe him. Largely because the Barnard Castle story is so farcical.
SIXTY MILES (there and back) on his WIFE’S BIRTHDAY to test his eyesight? No unbiased observer can believe that.
Once you realise he has lied on this point, it brings into question his whole account.
Even more alarming to me is Boris’s new announcements, seemingly timed in order to bounce Dom off the front page.
Why didn’t he announce these on Sunday?
Is it because lockdown policy is now following a timetable designed to save Boris’s skin?
Please don’t tell me we are “following the science”.
Let’s see a poll. I hope that a larger percentage of the British public now sees Boris as the waffling charlatan that he always was.
I thought he managed his speech very well, but there were times during questions where he was struggling not to snap.
And agree about the announcements; almost seems a change of policy.
To be fair to the PM, the change of policy was always going to be this week, with start of June the target date for the implementation.
The announcements were possibly brought forward by a couple of days but that would probably actually be better as it gives businesses more time to adapt.
I don't see any evidence in the data that the 'unlocking' already made around the world has led to any statistical uptick in case numbers in those countries that are well clear of their peaks. If this continues, pressure to move more quickly will only grow.
Yet another example of a "super spreader". The R number will, in my view, prove to be a completely meaningless average. It is an average between the majority who are barely infectious at all outwith the extended proximity of their own family and a few, for reasons we don't yet understand, who can infect hundreds with minimal contact. The latter are the key to controlling the spread of the virus. We need to be able to trace and isolate them fast.
That's true - to control spread you need to identify those [people|actions] that spread the most. But R isn't supposed to do that, it's a measure of the overall situation and the lumpiness is irrelevant for that. If R > 1 then trouble ahead (how quickly depending how much > 1). If R < 1 then things are going to get better.
R is a useful measure of what it measures. It might be that R doesn't do what you'd like it to do. It's a bit like saying GDP growth figures are useless to assess the economy because even in a recession there are some people making fortunes.
But getting the R number down is all about controlling the super spreaders and really pretty irrelevant to what the rest of us do. It is not a justification for the current regulations.
Yes, but in the absence of 'controlling the super spreaders' the blanket approach (adjusted by looking at what it does to Rt) is all we have.
The tracking apps, if they work, will tell us a lot more about the how and (possibly, if there is a who in terms of demographics of those more likely to spread) the who.
Do we have any analysis yet of the relative impact of 'super spreaders' (however defined) compared to everyone else? I haven't seen anything but would be very interested.
Well, there's this:
Full genome viral sequences inform patterns of SARS-CoV-2 spread into and within Israel https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.21.20104521v1 Full genome sequences are increasingly used to track the geographic spread and transmission dynamics of viral pathogens. Here, with a focus on Israel, we sequenced 212 SARS-CoV-2 sequences and use them to perform a comprehensive analysis to trace the origins and spread of the virus. A phylogenetic analysis including thousands of globally sampled sequences allowed us to infer multiple independent introductions into Israel, followed by local transmission. Returning travelers from the U.S. contributed dramatically more to viral spread relative to their proportion in incoming infected travelers. Using phylodynamic analysis, we estimated that the basic reproduction number of the virus was initially around ~2.0-2.6, dropping by two-thirds following the implementation of social distancing measures. A comparison between reported and model-estimated case numbers indicated high levels of transmission heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 spread, with between 1-10% of infected individuals resulting in 80% of secondary infections. Overall, our findings underscore the ability of this virus to efficiently transmit between and within countries, as well as demonstrate the effectiveness of social distancing measures for reducing its spread...
Not sure the idea about him not travelling again has been disproven, yet. He said originally he hadn't travelled a second time and then he did.
Unless he provides proof via GPS or whatever else, that allegation remains.
He confirmed in his statement he had GPS proof he did not go back a second time
However, this weekend we have witnessed Boris lose his USP and allow Cummings to damage his government
In my opinion it is over for both of them but I am not sure just when
Boris should take paternity leave at best and if I was betting I would put 2021 as his resignation/retirement
This won't be the last time Cummings will drop Johnson right in the shit. The PM has had his warning.
Off topic.
Rifling through my favourite automotive archive footage during lockdown, I was reminded of a Rover Group video from the 1980s. The late Tony Pond covers the TT course in a Rover 827 Vitesse (yes a Rover 827!) averaging a shade under a 100mph for the entire run. Pond even gets the power steering fluid to boiling point! It is on YouTube, I just searched Tony Pond, Rover, TT and all 15 minutes plus of the run are shown. It is remarkable drive which one would be hard to beat with something newer and more sophisticated.
I think some nutter has had a Sexy Wrexy around the TT course at 125mph+ now.
We had a Rover 825D as the ship's car on Ark Royal. Sub Lt [CLASSIFIED] and I roasted the clutch out of it while hooning it and then later denied everything. As Dom might say, that was how I interpreted the rules, it was an extreme situation and I acted with integrity.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
Not quite, Blair didn't gaslight / treat with contempt everything everyone has done for the past 8 weeks. In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris did just that.
A famed moralist one said "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.". He also said something about Samaritans that I always thought was a bit passive aggressive towards Samaritans.
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
Why would I think Ayn Rand talks cobblers? She's one of the greatest modern moral philosophers and speaks a lot of sense. Ayn Rand is brilliant, everyone should read Atlas Shrugged.
Suddenly everything becomes clear.
Even if you disagree with every word Ayn Rand has to say, she has a brilliant intellect and has contributed genuinely new philosophical ideas. Which is more than anyone on this board has ever done.
One of the things I like about PB is that we largely respect people's viewpoints and life philosophies without descending into Twitter style shouting matches.
Political philosophy is rarely "cobblers" even when you disagree with it. I wouldn't write Marxism off as a load of old cobblers even though I think it's harmful and dangerous. Even those you disagree with often have something interesting to say.
I've always been impressed by the way PB has been willing to look respectfully and open-mindedly at Marx and Marxism.
I've been incited to have another look at Ayn Rand.
She is somewhat pulpy in her writing, but there are a lot of very interesting thoughts contained therein.
It's easy to write her off because she's a bit of a hack when it comes to fiction, but we read Animal Farm or 1984 for their ideas rather than the quality of their writing. And more of us have read 1984 than the Road to Wigan Pier.
I think Francisco's Money Speech is a fairly interesting place to start because it's relatively short and digestible. Unfortunately Rand has the habit of making the same point over and over again (perhaps she would be welcome here?) because she was a habitual speed user (hopefully no PB'ers are).
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Or people are naturally less worried as the virus has been contained more and they're looking to the future and getting back to normal already. People are already planning taking kids back to school, going to the beach, seeing their family again, looking forward to shops reopening etc before any of this news broke.
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
Not quite, Blair didn't gaslight / treat with contempt everything everyone has done for the past 8 weeks. In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris did just that.
Its alright, he let us know we were just confused. And reminded us again in yesterdays press conference. Sooner or later the public will stop being confused and things will be fine.
Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its literally what Dom said yesterday. There's more than one illness in the world.
So why the rush up to Durham?
Because she was ill and he'd been heavily exposed to the virus and everyone he was working with was falling ill. So if he fell ill too then his nieces were available for childcare. Isn't that what he said?
So, one rule for him and another for everyone else.
What an original insight. She was clearly fairly ill, and it could well have been Covid-19 - I'm fairly sure I had it but the respiratory symptoms were barely there. Cummings explained clearly enough why he acted according to the rules and common sense yesterday. It would be a disgrace if he'd been forced to resign because the media and some salty Remainers demanded his head.
A lot of people were very ill. many of them had children. They did not break the lockdown rules to drive through the night to a second home. Therein lies the problem.
He drove to his parents' home to ensure availability of childcare - a valid reason. As there was a separate cottage on the property it was possible to do so and to isolate. Of course not everybody is lucky enough to be able to do that, but it doesn't mean he was wrong to.
It's not a valid reason, because the exception to the lockdown rules is one that requires the child to be in immediate danger, of which there is no evidence (on his own account he never needed help with childcare). He had family in London who could have helped. And personally, I would rather have had friends or neighbours nearby look after my kid than a 17 year old. Anyway, can't chat on here all day, I have to go for a drive to make sure that my eyes are working ok.
Before you walk to the car remember to check your legs first!
If you've not been walking for weeks because of an illness then testing your legs first before you go for a long walk is what anyone sane would do.
Walking with dodgy legs isn't going to kill anyone else.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The Conservative Party has a majority. That is not the same as Johnson/Gove/Cummings having a majority.
As long as Johnson/Gove/Cummings have the confidence of the Conservative Party it is.
I am hoping this affair will convince the government to see sense and adopt a much more dynamic approach to re-starting the economy. We might save something.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Or people are naturally less worried as the virus has been contained more and they're looking to the future and getting back to normal already. People are already planning taking kids back to school, going to the beach, seeing their family again, looking forward to shops reopening etc before any of this news broke.
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
So 8 weeks of 1% drop with news focused on science 1 weekend of news focused on key govt adviser breaking the rules and sudden 10% drop
No causation at all of course, they all just miraculously arrived at the same conclusion!
As I say Im not sure it is a bad thing, but it shows that his behaviour has had a massive impact on the governments ability to influence the actions of the nation.
Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Or people are naturally less worried as the virus has been contained more and they're looking to the future and getting back to normal already. People are already planning taking kids back to school, going to the beach, seeing their family again, looking forward to shops reopening etc before any of this news broke.
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
If the story had broken three weeks ago, they might have got their man.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
Not quite, Blair didn't gaslight / treat with contempt everything everyone has done for the past 8 weeks. In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris did just that.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
Not quite, Blair didn't gaslight / treat with contempt everything everyone has done for the past 8 weeks. In 2 minutes on Sunday Boris did just that.
Of course he did.
Bernie Ecclestone, David Kelly, invading Iraq, flying to Davos, kowtowing to Murdoch, his interesting tax affairs.
There's lots of examples and by and large the public just shrigs it shoulders and switches on Love Island.
There was a saddening mini thread on here last night which I was too tired to reply to (the ever brilliant @Cyclefree got there first).
Essentially two or three culinary-challenged middle-aged blokes were entirely sanguine about the closure (and possible destruction) of the hospitality and catering industry, because Covid-19 had forced them to learn to cook.
Sad. In three ways.
1. They should learned to cook years ago. FFS.
2. Going out to pubs and restaurants is not really about eating. It’s about atmosphere and interaction and meeting people.
3. Pubs are the backbone of Britain. Its ultimate infrastructure. Its selling point. They are what makes it unique, and lovely.
The threadette upset me so much I had to get this off my chest.
Wake up!
To be honest, I worry about the hospitality industry. Personally, I think there's a case for continuing the furlough scheme for those specifically when it's wound up for others. Preserve the industry as it was until we can restore it.
The hospitality industry relies on people having disposable income. Well we don't now. Restaurants and bars will suffer badly irrespective.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
Aside from the party political angle, this episode has really rekindled some of my latent libertarian tendencies. Our regular system of laws - now turbocharged by the coronavirus regulations - is so onerous that it's hardly possibly for a private citizen to take a shit without a lawyer being able to identify some technical illegality at some stage in the process...
'Well, according to the Section 16 of the 1956 Clean Air Act, an offence is committed...'
Very easily. A few days before the GE, the stupid 'photogate' story (another Mirror smear-job) caused a wave of outrage that was captured in the final YouGov MRP, causing the predicted majority to fall to 28, and for people like you (and you specifically) to imagine that Corbyn was on his way to victory.
A few days days later, people forgot their outrage, and we landslided you anyway.
That was after about four days. There are now four years until the next election.
A famed moralist one said "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.". He also said something about Samaritans that I always thought was a bit passive aggressive towards Samaritans.
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
Why would I think Ayn Rand talks cobblers? She's one of the greatest modern moral philosophers and speaks a lot of sense. Ayn Rand is brilliant, everyone should read Atlas Shrugged.
Suddenly everything becomes clear.
Even if you disagree with every word Ayn Rand has to say, she has a brilliant intellect and has contributed genuinely new philosophical ideas. Which is more than anyone on this board has ever done.
One of the things I like about PB is that we largely respect people's viewpoints and life philosophies without descending into Twitter style shouting matches.
Political philosophy is rarely "cobblers" even when you disagree with it. I wouldn't write Marxism off as a load of old cobblers even though I think it's harmful and dangerous. Even those you disagree with often have something interesting to say.
I've always been impressed by the way PB has been willing to look respectfully and open-mindedly at Marx and Marxism.
I've been incited to have another look at Ayn Rand.
She is somewhat pulpy in her writing, but there are a lot of very interesting thoughts contained therein.
It's easy to write her off because she's a bit of a hack when it comes to fiction, but we read Animal Farm or 1984 for their ideas rather than the quality of their writing. And more of us have read 1984 than the Road to Wigan Pier.
I think Francisco's Money Speech is a fairly interesting place to start because it's relatively short and digestible. Unfortunately Rand has the habit of making the same point over and over again (perhaps she would be welcome here?) because she was a habitual speed user (hopefully no PB'ers are).
Ayn Rand had a reasonable intellect, but was deeply emotionally damaged by the trauma of her family's uprooting from Russia. This is reflected both in her writing and her point of view.
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
Aside from the party political angle, this episode has really rekindled some of my latent libertarian tendencies. Our regular system of laws - now turbocharged by the coronavirus regulations - is so onerous that it's hardly possibly for a private citizen to take a shit without a lawyer being able to identify some technical illegality at some stage in the process...
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
I think the second peak if it comes is likely to be in the autumn/winter.
But we are not in March if we reopen
There will be far more working from home There will be very little tourism There will be less public transport People are far more scared than they were and will naturally socially distance and hand wash more than in March Shops, offices, schools etc will have adjusted The summer means far less coughing as less colds around
By October/November some of those things may no longer apply and people will be more complacent, so that would be my concern.
There was a saddening mini thread on here last night which I was too tired to reply to (the ever brilliant @Cyclefree got there first).
Essentially two or three culinary-challenged middle-aged blokes were entirely sanguine about the closure (and possible destruction) of the hospitality and catering industry, because Covid-19 had forced them to learn to cook.
Sad. In three ways.
1. They should learned to cook years ago. FFS.
2. Going out to pubs and restaurants is not really about eating. It’s about atmosphere and interaction and meeting people.
3. Pubs are the backbone of Britain. Its ultimate infrastructure. Its selling point. They are what makes it unique, and lovely.
The threadette upset me so much I had to get this off my chest.
Wake up!
On cooking, I could always cook the basics but never had a reason to learn to cook well. Food is easily available and I can feed myself basics or other people can do it. I don't know how to knit my own clothes or kiln my own crockery either. I see no shame in that.
Since lockdown began I've definitely learnt to cook better and I've lost a lot of weight so win/win.
But besides that I agree completely. Yes pubs and restaurants are entirely about atmosphere. Drinking a pint in a pub versus drinking a can or bottle of the same drink at home are not the same thing.
It happens so rarely these days that I must leap in and log agreement with a sentence of yours - being the final one here. And at a stretch the penultimate one too.
Speaking personally, I've taken more than one exercise walk on most days - I live in an area with a lot of open space, so doing so has not carried, in my opinion, any additional risk. I really don't care what anyone here thinks about that.
The point coming out I think is people having a different attitude to the rules. There are those who think the rules are there to prevent harm, so as long as harm is prevented, they can be interpreted more liberally. They are the sort who would drive at 80 on the motorway if they judged it was safe to do so. And there are those who follow the rules to the letter, and are angry with those who don't. And of course there are people who are complete hypocrites who apply the rules liberally to themselves but literally to others. A rather large number.
You'd have been sacked if you were Chris Whitty, Vallance or Matt Hancock and admitted to that.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
I don't agree. Campbell was Blair's muscle, if you like, but Blair made the decisions. The relationship between Cummings and Johnson is very different; Johnson can't get things done without Cummings, so the need is much greater.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred as many current infections now.
No the mystery is that people like you think there will be.
The evidence is that the disease spreads, peaks and then dissipates, whatever the prevailing government's approach to fighting it.
That is the conclusion of the Oxford University group having studied its path everywhere and the longer we go on the more correct they look.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
The issue is actually the way they kept Cummings and the impact that will have later this year.
Just you wait and see how bad the impact of Boris's speech on May 24th is when things need to lock down again.
Its no different than Blair keeping Alistair Campbell. The caravan moves on and something different takes its place.
I don't agree. Campbell was Blair's muscle, if you like, but Blair made the decisions. The relationship between Cummings and Johnson is very different; Johnson can't get things done without Cummings, so the need is much greater.
Blair also had a talented cabinet, several of his cabinet could have been reasonable PMs.
A famed moralist one said "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.". He also said something about Samaritans that I always thought was a bit passive aggressive towards Samaritans.
Nevertheless, another chap, further east, a few centuries before said "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Someone else, down in Arabia, expressed similar sentiments a few centuries later when he said "Seek for mankind that of which you are desirous for yourself"
Others of a more athiestic bent have echoed such sentiments. Nothing, not even family, comes before your duty not to harm, or risk harm, to your fellow man. Otherwise you start having concentric circles of concern up to and invluding the volk. The only individual I can think of who disagrees is Ayn Rand who, I am sure we can all agree, taks complete cobblers.
As a result of considering the available evidence offered me by a number of moral philosophers down the centuries, I have come to the tentative conclusion the mere convenience of your childcare arrangements does not trump a duty to protect lives from either (i) infection from a deadly virus or (ii) driving while visually impaired.
Why would I think Ayn Rand talks cobblers? She's one of the greatest modern moral philosophers and speaks a lot of sense. Ayn Rand is brilliant, everyone should read Atlas Shrugged.
Suddenly everything becomes clear.
Even if you disagree with every word Ayn Rand has to say, she has a brilliant intellect and has contributed genuinely new philosophical ideas. Which is more than anyone on this board has ever done.
One of the things I like about PB is that we largely respect people's viewpoints and life philosophies without descending into Twitter style shouting matches.
Political philosophy is rarely "cobblers" even when you disagree with it. I wouldn't write Marxism off as a load of old cobblers even though I think it's harmful and dangerous. Even those you disagree with often have something interesting to say.
I've always been impressed by the way PB has been willing to look respectfully and open-mindedly at Marx and Marxism.
I've been incited to have another look at Ayn Rand.
She is somewhat pulpy in her writing, but there are a lot of very interesting thoughts contained therein.
It's easy to write her off because she's a bit of a hack when it comes to fiction, but we read Animal Farm or 1984 for their ideas rather than the quality of their writing. And more of us have read 1984 than the Road to Wigan Pier.
I think Francisco's Money Speech is a fairly interesting place to start because it's relatively short and digestible. Unfortunately Rand has the habit of making the same point over and over again (perhaps she would be welcome here?) because she was a habitual speed user (hopefully no PB'ers are).
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
I think you're over egging this.
Cummings "crime" is to have pissed off a lot of people in the media so they want his head on a plate. If you're telling me the journos and their editors are all religiously adhering to the rules, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there isn't a second peak of any significance, provided we learn the lessons from the first peak about the types of people who are affected by the virus. This isn't like seasonal flu which affects young and healthy people.
One thing that concerns me in retrospect about the herd immunity strategy that the Government were apparently following until mid-March was that no-one was saying anything about the issue that all other coronaviruses have a tendency to have infection-induced-immunity wear off.
The four common cold coronaviruses: you start being susceptible to reinfection in 3-6 months. SARS, which is much more serious and triggers a much greater immune reaction, seems to start wearing off immunity-wise in about 2 years.
So if this is mid-way between them, and we failed to get a vaccine, we'd be vulnerable to be hit by it every year on average.
To add to the avalanche of good news, the Racing Post will be back as a print edition next Monday and on June 15th (just in time for Ascot, call me a cynic) betting shops which are apparently deemed "non essential retail" will be able to re-open.
Not 100% sure how social distancing and hygiene will work around the FOBT machines - perhaps they will stay closed though somehow given their importance to the bookmakers, I doubt it.
I also gather that while it is my civic duty not to use public transport, it is apparently now my civic duty to empty my bank balance into the local economy. Well, the local chinese takeaway will benefit but I'll still avoid Primark - nothing to do with covid-19, I just don't like the place.
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
I think you're over egging this.
Cummings "crime" is to have pissed off a lot of people in the media so they want his head on a plate. If you're telling me the journos and their editors are all religiously adhering to the rules, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Quite, and they will be happy not to be found out.
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
I think you're over egging this.
Cummings "crime" is to have pissed off a lot of people in the media so they want his head on a plate. If you're telling me the journos and their editors are all religiously adhering to the rules, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
I'm ignoring Cummings "crime" now. The important point to take from Sunday is that "rules are for others" and that means a lot of people are going to ignore them.
"Conservative MP Sir Desmond Swayne backs Dominic Cummings over claims of lockdown breach: "Whatever your opinion... he is staying. Like it or lump it."
Indeed.
And that's the story really, isn't it?
The media are only now waking up to the fact the tories under Johnson have a towering majority in government.
Finally, in keeping Cummings, they have started to actually govern. If this sorry affair leads to the government ignoring the Morgans and the Rigbys more in future. will have achieved something.
Right lines (sort of) but here is a better way to look at it -
That 80 seat majority means big political capital and Johnson has chosen to spend a chunk of it on keeping Cummings since he would be lost without him.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
In practice, the difference is that an awful lot of people will continue the kind of informal social distancing that they began before the official lockdown. Shops, bars, restaurants, gyms etc. will re-open, but a substantial fraction of the population will give them a wide berth. Those who can continue to work from home will do so. This will not end until there is either a vaccine or a robust system of contact tracing and quarantine that ensures that the infected are kept away from the non-infected, and there has been enough time to demonstrate that the problem is now under control.
This is not quite "worst of all worlds", but it's definitely not great: demand will not recover enough for businesses to make up the losses they incurred in the past few months, or even for them to tread water. Substantial loan deferrals or debt forgiveness may be needed, or we will see a wave of insolvencies. Those who believe that Boris can flip a switch and "end the lockdown" may be very dissapointed with the results.
It's going to take excellent communications, excellent timing, and very high levels of competence in the delivery of either the vaccine or the quarantine system. This is the job that the government will end up being judged on.
The Cummings story is into the 'use bits of it to sneer at other people' phase, the BBC presenters are preventing their interviewees being interviewed as successfully as usual by interrupting every 3rd second, @Bobazina is possessed by the Ghost of Colonel Blimp (or Arthur Mee for heritage types) on telling everyone what pubs are for, and it's evil to learn to cook.
My trivial thought for all those media-warblers outraged about "How dare Cummings take his wife and child on a trip to check his eyesight, putting them at risk?"
Um - how was he supposed to get back home if it turned out to be faulty?
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Or people are naturally less worried as the virus has been contained more and they're looking to the future and getting back to normal already. People are already planning taking kids back to school, going to the beach, seeing their family again, looking forward to shops reopening etc before any of this news broke.
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
So 8 weeks of 1% drop with news focused on science 1 weekend of news focused on key govt adviser breaking the rules and sudden 10% drop
No causation at all of course, they all just miraculously arrived at the same conclusion!
As I say Im not sure it is a bad thing, but it shows that his behaviour has had a massive impact on the governments ability to influence the actions of the nation.
Correlation does not equal causation.
I think we could all see real world changes before this story broke.
There was a saddening mini thread on here last night which I was too tired to reply to (the ever brilliant @Cyclefree got there first).
Essentially two or three culinary-challenged middle-aged blokes were entirely sanguine about the closure (and possible destruction) of the hospitality and catering industry, because Covid-19 had forced them to learn to cook.
Sad. In three ways.
1. They should learned to cook years ago. FFS.
2. Going out to pubs and restaurants is not really about eating. It’s about atmosphere and interaction and meeting people.
3. Pubs are the backbone of Britain. Its ultimate infrastructure. Its selling point. They are what makes it unique, and lovely.
The threadette upset me so much I had to get this off my chest.
Wake up!
Conflating two issues to make a point that is entirely different.
It is very difficult to open pubs and restaurants with a novel virus flying around. That doesn't mean I was sanguine about the effect this will have on the economy. I am however being realistic. Of course it will. Pubs and restaurants were closing before they were asked to by the government. For many, there will be no reopening - this is very sad for those involved, but better times will return and so will the sector, as their means of protection are not being destroyed as they would be in a war or a natural disaster. As ever, people who want the parts of the lockdown over or swiftly eased ignore the fact that the economy was heavily wounded before it, because of fear, and will be heavily wounded after it, because people's habits will change.
I've been able to cook perfectly adequately, thank you. But this time has made me realise that I was getting lazy and cooking the same dishes, or ordering the same takeaways, or going to mediocre restaurants (of which there were many) and its nice to have the time and opportunity to learn more.
Pubs are not the backbone of Britain. They are not the ultimate infrastructure. They're a pleasant, enjoyable means of drinking, eating and sometimes socialising. I love pubs and restaurants, and probably spend more time in them than most given my largely domestic travelling. But they're not the be all and end all. I'm likely going to be having far more dinner parties after this, and fewer pub trips. Its the people I miss, not the place.
One thing that concerns me in retrospect about the herd immunity strategy that the Government were apparently following until mid-March was that no-one was saying anything about the issue that all other coronaviruses have a tendency to have infection-induced-immunity wear off.
The four common cold coronaviruses: you start being susceptible to reinfection in 3-6 months. SARS, which is much more serious and triggers a much greater immune reaction, seems to start wearing off immunity-wise in about 2 years.
So if this is mid-way between them, and we failed to get a vaccine, we'd be vulnerable to be hit by it every year on average.
That's not an attractive option, really.
Sweden went for herd immunity and failed. Stockholm's antibody rate is far lower than London's and yet the deaths per million is also lower than ours.
Why??
The only logical explanation comes from professor Gupta at Oxford. There is a large reservoir of people for whom Corona is simply not a thing. They have immunity through genes or being exposed to other viruses.
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
I think you're over egging this.
Cummings "crime" is to have pissed off a lot of people in the media so they want his head on a plate. If you're telling me the journos and their editors are all religiously adhering to the rules, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
I'm ignoring Cummings "crime" now. The important point to take from Sunday is that "rules are for others" and that means a lot of people are going to ignore them.
But that's been the case forever. To pretend this is somehow unique or shocking simply demonstrates a striking lack of knowledge or a Nelsonian Eye. MPs, senior civil servants, the police break the rules all the time and its only when England is going though one of its periods of moral cant that these are made an issue.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Or people are naturally less worried as the virus has been contained more and they're looking to the future and getting back to normal already. People are already planning taking kids back to school, going to the beach, seeing their family again, looking forward to shops reopening etc before any of this news broke.
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
So 8 weeks of 1% drop with news focused on science 1 weekend of news focused on key govt adviser breaking the rules and sudden 10% drop
No causation at all of course, they all just miraculously arrived at the same conclusion!
As I say Im not sure it is a bad thing, but it shows that his behaviour has had a massive impact on the governments ability to influence the actions of the nation.
Correlation does not equal causation.
I think we could all see real world changes before this story broke.
It is remarkable that on about 20 issues around Cummings you seem to be unwilling to accept anything negative about him on each one. Truly remarkable. Even his mum might not go so far.
I and many others criticising him are also willing to say plenty of positive things about him. The mere fact that he is so influential to the govt shows his ability to control and organise. Ive said if he really needed time to rest in a more comfortable place for the good of the nation, communicated properly that would have been fine. It is the lies, taking us for mugs that is most offensive.
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
Other examples of a second peak include....????
The mystery is why on earth people like you think there shouldn't a second peak.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there isn't a second peak of any significance, provided we learn the lessons from the first peak about the types of people who are affected by the virus. This isn't like seasonal flu which affects young and healthy people.
You don't think there would be a second peak, if we all went back to normal now?
Think about it. In normal life, the number of cases is believed to double every 2 or 3 days. According to the ONS survey, there are currently something like 140,000 people infected.
On those figures, there would be 7 million cases within a fortnight.
The only thing that will prevent that is keeping at least some social distancing measures in place. In combination with tracking, tracing and isolating (!) cases. The better we can do at the latter, the more restrictions can be relaxed. But to suggest we can all go back to normal now, when we still have such a large number of cases, is sheer lunacy.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
If the Tories get -1% at the next election, ie they get 49.5% of the vote and all other parties combined get 50.5% of the vote, I'd be absolutely delighted!
Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Yes, that fits my anecdotal experience that people are less fearful.
They have worked out that Covid-19 is safe for fit and healthy under 60s.
Risk segmentation is the way forward.
After your comment last week about hospitalisation risks for under-60s, I went to have a look. Of course, it may be unrepresentative, but New York found this:
It must be borne in mind that the age categories are of different widths: 0-19 is twice as wide as 45-54, for example, and 20-44 is 2-and-a-half times as wide. So, adjusting for that and looking at the raw numbers, we have it that:
For those in my age category (45-55), my chance of being hospitalised by this is... exactly the same as for someone of 55-64, about three-quarters the chance of those from 65-74, and more than half that of someone of 75-84.
Hmm. That's not negligible, as you claimed. And seem to be still claiming.
For those of 20-44, they've got about a fifth the chance of being hospitalised as a 65-74-year-old, and about a sixth the chance of a 75-84-year old. Of the 2,449 hospitalised there, 705 were between 20-44.
The difference is that, with hospital support, they're far more likely to recover. Eventually, anyway. So as long as hospitals aren't overloaded, they should survive.
As I'm self-employed, if I end up in hospital and have a prolonged convalescence, as many people do, I'd be screwed. And I'm well under 60, and pretty fit and healthy, but my chances of being hospitalised by this thing are certainly not negligible.
Why do you keep insisting they are? Is it just something you want to be true, or do you have some good evidence otherwise? I'd love to be properly reassured here.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
If the Tories get -1% at the next election, ie they get 49.5% of the vote and all other parties combined get 50.5% of the vote, I'd be absolutely delighted!
Yeah but that trajectory is what should worry you. Have a look at the 6-month slide following Black Wednesday.
This has been an unmitigated disaster for Johnson's Gov't. It's absolutely gobsmacking to me and I can't quite believe my luck.
One thing that concerns me in retrospect about the herd immunity strategy that the Government were apparently following until mid-March was that no-one was saying anything about the issue that all other coronaviruses have a tendency to have infection-induced-immunity wear off.
The four common cold coronaviruses: you start being susceptible to reinfection in 3-6 months. SARS, which is much more serious and triggers a much greater immune reaction, seems to start wearing off immunity-wise in about 2 years.
So if this is mid-way between them, and we failed to get a vaccine, we'd be vulnerable to be hit by it every year on average.
That's not an attractive option, really.
Sweden went for herd immunity and failed. Stockholm's antibody rate is far lower than London's and yet the deaths per million is also lower than ours.
Why??
The only logical explanation comes from professor Gupta at Oxford. There is a large reservoir of people for whom Corona is simply not a thing. They have immunity through genes or being exposed to other viruses.
You have only to read about incident in America where nearly 90% of the members of a choir were infected to see that's not the case.
Very easily. A few days before the GE, the stupid 'photogate' story (another Mirror smear-job) caused a wave of outrage that was captured in the final YouGov MRP, causing the predicted majority to fall to 28, and for people like you (and you specifically) to imagine that Corbyn was on his way to victory.
A few days days later, people forgot their outrage, and we landslided you anyway.
That was after about four days. There are now four years until the next election.
You're welcome
But you can't fatten the "Boris" on polling day.
You can't fatten 17 stone of pure muscle anyway, so why even try?
COVID-19 Outcomes in 4712 consecutively confirmed SARS-CoV2 cases in the city of Madrid. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109850v1 There is limited information describing features and outcomes of patients requiring hospitalization for COVID19 disease and still no treatments have clearly demonstrated efficacy. Demographics and clinical variables on admission, as well as laboratory markers and therapeutic interventions were extracted from electronic Clinical Records (eCR) in 4712 SARS-CoV2 infected patients attending 4 public Hospitals in Madrid. Patients were stratified according to age and stage of severity. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, cut-off points that best discriminated mortality were obtained for each of the studied variables. Principal components analysis and a neural network (NN) algorithm were applied. A high mortality incidence associated to age >70, comorbidities (hypertension, neurological disorders and diabetes), altered vitals such as fever, heart rhythm disturbances or elevated systolic blood pressure, and alterations in several laboratory tests. Remarkably, analysis of therapeutic options either taken individually or in combination drew a universal relationship between the use of Cyclosporine A and better outcomes as also a benefit of tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids in critically ill patients. We present a large Spanish population-based study addressing factors influencing survival in current SARS CoV2 pandemic, with particular emphasis on the effectivity of treatments. In addition, we have generated an NN capable of identifying severity predictors of SARS CoV2. A rapid extraction and management of data protocol from eCR and artificial intelligence in-house implementations allowed us to perform almost real time monitoring of the outbreak evolution.
One thing that concerns me in retrospect about the herd immunity strategy that the Government were apparently following until mid-March was that no-one was saying anything about the issue that all other coronaviruses have a tendency to have infection-induced-immunity wear off.
The four common cold coronaviruses: you start being susceptible to reinfection in 3-6 months. SARS, which is much more serious and triggers a much greater immune reaction, seems to start wearing off immunity-wise in about 2 years.
So if this is mid-way between them, and we failed to get a vaccine, we'd be vulnerable to be hit by it every year on average.
That's not an attractive option, really.
Sweden went for herd immunity and failed. Stockholm's antibody rate is far lower than London's and yet the deaths per million is also lower than ours.
Why??
The only logical explanation comes from professor Gupta at Oxford. There is a large reservoir of people for whom Corona is simply not a thing. They have immunity through genes or being exposed to other viruses.
That's the one where the maximum number of Covid-19 deaths in the UK is under probably under 6,700, even if we all get infected, right?
Rich Sunak has taken a dive too - from 35% 4 days ago to 20%.
Starmer is up slightly (to 12% but basically flat.
Of concern: Level of worry, with 35% of people saying they’re very worried or the most worried they’ve ever been, is at the lowest since we started tracking.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
The virus hasn't got any less lethal - if people aren't worried about hand washing or social distancing we'll have a second peak on our hands with a compromised government communication campaign.
The virus has got less lethal. It's literally killing about 10% of the people as it was at the peak.
We can continue to wash hands and socially distance without being terrified.
If his supporters turn on him it'd be news. That Labour voters are no longer supporting him isn't news.
I've got many tory friends who are absolutely incandescent. They feel that they and others sacrificed almost everything and their leadership have taken them for complete fools.
You should follow Cummings' example and get out more.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
If the Tories get -1% at the next election, ie they get 49.5% of the vote and all other parties combined get 50.5% of the vote, I'd be absolutely delighted!
I’m surprised that anybody, four years out, unaware of how the pandemic plays out, or what the eventual impact on the economy will be, with no idea of how the government will perform and no idea of what policies will be proposed knows how they are going to vote. If you do then you are a tribal loyalist more interested in the brand than performance, sad really.
Big Dom goes Saturday morning, Boris comes out and shows leadership, says can't have one rule for one, another for the rest, so important to stick to the advice, know from personal experience how evil this virus is, feel for all those affected, and btw deaths down, hospital admissions down, shops open in a couple of weeks..
Result would be no hit to ratings and other than twitter / guardian nobody caring about the weird bald bloke who got the sack.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
If the Tories get -1% at the next election, ie they get 49.5% of the vote and all other parties combined get 50.5% of the vote, I'd be absolutely delighted!
Yes because thats how approval ratings work.....or not.
SARS-CoV-2 epitopes are recognized by a public and diverse repertoire of human T-cell receptors
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.20.20107813v1 Understanding the determinants of adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is critical for fighting the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assayed both antibody and T-cell reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigens in COVID-19 convalescent patients and healthy donors sampled before and during the pandemic. Our results show that while anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies can distinguish convalescent patients from healthy donors, the magnitude of T-cell response was more pronounced in healthy donors sampled during COVID-19 pandemic than in donors sampled before the outbreak. This hints at the possibility that some individuals have encountered the virus but were protected by T-cell cross-reactivity observed. A public and diverse T-cell response was observed for two A*02-restricted SARS-CoV-2 epitopes, revealing a set of T-cell receptor motifs displaying germline-encoded features. Bulk CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein S is characterized by multiple groups of homologous T-cell receptor sequences some of which are shared across multiple donors, indicating the existence of immunodominant epitopes. Overall, our findings indicate that T cells form an efficient response to SARS-CoV-2 and alongside the antibodies can serve as a useful biomarker for surveying SARS-CoV-2 exposure and immunity. We hope that data, including the set of specific T-cell receptors identified in this study can serve as a basis for future developments of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations and monitoring.,/i>
The tories have four years to turn this around. We have seen from recent events that even one year is an incredibly long time in politics.
You will be lucky to turn this around in forty years. Boris horlicksed the easy bit. Boris' management of he economic chaos to come fills me with dread.
If his supporters turn on him it'd be news. That Labour voters are no longer supporting him isn't news.
I've got many tory friends who are absolutely incandescent. They feel that they and others sacrificed almost everything and their leadership have taken them for complete fools.
You should follow Cummings' example and get out more.
Then your Tory friends are - to put it politely - obtuse. One man driving to Durham had fuck all effect on the efficacy of the national lockdown, as proven by the statistics demonstrating the, er, efficacy of the national lockdown. Their sacrifices are worth precisely as much as they always were, which is a hell of a lot.
If people are pissed about an advisor breaking the rules, wait until they find out that furloughed really means sacked with a long notice period.
I predict a load of people are going to enjoy the summer, spend their wages like they are going back to work in September, then get a very nasty shock. And they won't be blaming themselves for this.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
If the Tories get -1% at the next election, ie they get 49.5% of the vote and all other parties combined get 50.5% of the vote, I'd be absolutely delighted!
I’m surprised that anybody, four years out, unaware of how the pandemic plays out, or what the eventual impact on the economy will be, with no idea of how the government will perform and no idea of what policies will be proposed knows how they are going to vote. If you do then you are a tribal loyalist more interested in the brand than performance, sad really.
I think most of us on this site have a very good idea how we will vote.
Big Dom goes Saturday morning, Boris comes out and shows leadership, says can't have one rule for one, another for the rest, so important to stick to the advice, know from personal experience how evil this virus is, feel for all those affected, and btw deaths down, hospital admissions down, shops open in a couple of weeks..
Result would be no hit to ratings and other than twitter / guardian nobody caring about the weird bald bloke who got the sack.
3 months later, weird bald bloke comes back.
I'd go further. I think if he had just apologised for an error of judgment, saying that even though no laws were breached, he regretted his actions as being in retrospect inadvisable for a person in his position, this would be over (bar the usual suspects) by now.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
And when the only referent in your political toolbox is 'Black Wednesday OMG!', then everything looks like Black Wednesday.
What about all the political scandals that looked big at the time, but _didn't_ turn out to be Black Wednesday? Some critical thinking, please.
It's the government falling victim to hammer-nail thinking. They're conditioned to think that the public will take their side if they go against the metropolitan media, but this isn't like that.
If people are pissed about an advisor breaking the rules, wait until they find out that furloughed really means sacked with a long notice period.
I predict a load of people are going to enjoy the summer, spend their wages like they are going back to work in September, then get a very nasty shock. And they won't be blaming themselves for this.
7.5 million on furlough?
My guess something like
4.5 million return to status quo 1.5 million return with lower pay and or less hours 1.5 million extra unemployed
If people are pissed about an advisor breaking the rules, wait until they find out that furloughed really means sacked with a long notice period.
I predict a load of people are going to enjoy the summer, spend their wages like they are going back to work in September, then get a very nasty shock. And they won't be blaming themselves for this.
7.5 million on furlough?
My guess something like
4.5 million return to status quo 1.5 million return with lower pay and or less hours 1.5 million extra unemployed
Obviously not all, but a significant proportion are not going back to the same job on the same wages / hours. And I don't think most people have realised this. More of the mindset this is a temporary thing, vaccine in the autumn, everything back to way it was in time for Christmas. And the government will get the blame.
Big Dom goes Saturday morning, Boris comes out and shows leadership, says can't have one rule for one, another for the rest, so important to stick to the advice, know from personal experience how evil this virus is, feel for all those affected, and btw deaths down, hospital admissions down, shops open in a couple of weeks..
Result would be no hit to ratings and other than twitter / guardian nobody caring about the weird bald bloke who got the sack.
3 months later, weird bald bloke comes back.
I'd go further. I think if he had just apologised for an error of judgment, saying that even though no laws were breached, he regretted his actions as being in retrospect inadvisable for a person in his position, this would be over (bar the usual suspects) by now.
And who on earth would have believed him ?
It would be as convincing as Cherie Blair apologising for being a woolly brained little woman in the Peter Foster affair, despite being a QC.
Comments
A few days days later, people forgot their outrage, and we landslided you anyway.
That was after about four days. There are now four years until the next election.
You're welcome
Indications seem to be that anywhere you spend indoors for a prolonged period with a number of other people, especially where the air is being recirculated, is also a more risky situation for these.
Outside tables separated by 2m+ and with only members of the same household at each table would look to be feasible for food/drinks as long as the surfaces are carefully wiped down and people get their own food and drink from a given location (thinking about the hospitality front).
Busy bars are definitely still a no-no, of course.
Its good as we look to get back to normal if people are less worried than they were. And its logical too given that transmission is much lower than it was.
After taking 8 weeks for it to gradually drop from 55 to 45, it drops to 35 this weekend.
Cummings actions have led to the end of lockdown for a significant percentage of the population. (Im not sure this is a bad thing, it may or may not be, perhaps its all a grand master plan to make us come out of being worried).
Full genome viral sequences inform patterns of SARS-CoV-2 spread into and within Israel
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.21.20104521v1
Full genome sequences are increasingly used to track the geographic spread and transmission dynamics of viral pathogens. Here, with a focus on Israel, we sequenced 212 SARS-CoV-2 sequences and use them to perform a comprehensive analysis to trace the origins and spread of the virus. A phylogenetic analysis including thousands of globally sampled sequences allowed us to infer multiple independent introductions into Israel, followed by local transmission. Returning travelers from the U.S. contributed dramatically more to viral spread relative to their proportion in incoming infected travelers. Using phylodynamic analysis, we estimated that the basic reproduction number of the virus was initially around ~2.0-2.6, dropping by two-thirds following the implementation of social distancing measures. A comparison between reported and model-estimated case numbers indicated high levels of transmission heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 spread, with between 1-10% of infected individuals resulting in 80% of secondary infections. Overall, our findings underscore the ability of this virus to efficiently transmit between and within countries, as well as demonstrate the effectiveness of social distancing measures for reducing its spread...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRg5Sp1iQMc
It's easy to write her off because she's a bit of a hack when it comes to fiction, but we read Animal Farm or 1984 for their ideas rather than the quality of their writing. And more of us have read 1984 than the Road to Wigan Pier.
I think Francisco's Money Speech is a fairly interesting place to start because it's relatively short and digestible. Unfortunately Rand has the habit of making the same point over and over again (perhaps she would be welcome here?) because she was a habitual speed user (hopefully no PB'ers are).
But this is a good read:
https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/
For weeks now there's been more and more garden parties on my street. There's been far more people this week hosting people in their gardens than there was even on VE Day.
Its only natural and logical that people are less concerned. If they were more concerned now than they were a couple of weeks ago, when schools are reopening next week, then that would be very bizarre.
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1265214921383587840?s=20
They have worked out that Covid-19 is safe for fit and healthy under 60s.
Risk segmentation is the way forward.
Driving with dodgy eyesight is.
1 weekend of news focused on key govt adviser breaking the rules and sudden 10% drop
No causation at all of course, they all just miraculously arrived at the same conclusion!
As I say Im not sure it is a bad thing, but it shows that his behaviour has had a massive impact on the governments ability to influence the actions of the nation.
I suspect those who know someone who has had it may feel very different - I know I do.
Bernie Ecclestone, David Kelly, invading Iraq, flying to Davos, kowtowing to Murdoch, his interesting tax affairs.
There's lots of examples and by and large the public just shrigs it shoulders and switches on Love Island.
If we go back to normal now, what's the difference from the situation in early March? The only difference I can think of is that we probably have a hundred times the number of current infections now.
'Well, according to the Section 16 of the 1956 Clean Air Act, an offence is committed...'
Campbell should've gone many times over, but the reason this bites beyond the bubble is almost the whole country went into lockdown, and quarantine restrictions meant people couldn't attend funerals or say goodbye to loved ones.
Cummings appears to have decided rules are for the little people. The PM has decided Cumming is more important than any damage that's been caused, which is a lot, and ongoing.
But we are not in March if we reopen
There will be far more working from home
There will be very little tourism
There will be less public transport
People are far more scared than they were and will naturally socially distance and hand wash more than in March
Shops, offices, schools etc will have adjusted
The summer means far less coughing as less colds around
By October/November some of those things may no longer apply and people will be more complacent, so that would be my concern.
The evidence is that the disease spreads, peaks and then dissipates, whatever the prevailing government's approach to fighting it.
That is the conclusion of the Oxford University group having studied its path everywhere and the longer we go on the more correct they look.
Then there are Ferguson worshippers like you.
i personally dont think, that despite genuine anger, it will result in a massive impact on Tory lead.
I would go for something like an 8% lead minimum and potentially still double figures.
Cummings "crime" is to have pissed off a lot of people in the media so they want his head on a plate. If you're telling me the journos and their editors are all religiously adhering to the rules, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
https://twitter.com/ChrisHopkins92/status/1265206072794648576?s=20
The four common cold coronaviruses: you start being susceptible to reinfection in 3-6 months.
SARS, which is much more serious and triggers a much greater immune reaction, seems to start wearing off immunity-wise in about 2 years.
So if this is mid-way between them, and we failed to get a vaccine, we'd be vulnerable to be hit by it every year on average.
That's not an attractive option, really.
As I mentioned yesterday, and I'm sure many others did, the Conservatives will never recover from this. The honeymoon is well and truly over.
Those heady days of high approval ratings are at an end. The new northern tory MPs will begin to finger their shirt collars nervously.
It's over. This isn't hyperbole. As Black Wednesday demonstrated, it only takes one catastrophic day to blow the people's trust for a generation.
To add to the avalanche of good news, the Racing Post will be back as a print edition next Monday and on June 15th (just in time for Ascot, call me a cynic) betting shops which are apparently deemed "non essential retail" will be able to re-open.
Not 100% sure how social distancing and hygiene will work around the FOBT machines - perhaps they will stay closed though somehow given their importance to the bookmakers, I doubt it.
I also gather that while it is my civic duty not to use public transport, it is apparently now my civic duty to empty my bank balance into the local economy. Well, the local chinese takeaway will benefit but I'll still avoid Primark - nothing to do with covid-19, I just don't like the place.
Cummings has been a bloody fool.
That 80 seat majority means big political capital and Johnson has chosen to spend a chunk of it on keeping Cummings since he would be lost without him.
How much has he spent? I'd say 25 seatsworth.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1265218396519575552?s=20
https://twitter.com/robertshrimsley/status/1265217177151561728?s=20
This is not quite "worst of all worlds", but it's definitely not great: demand will not recover enough for businesses to make up the losses they incurred in the past few months, or even for them to tread water. Substantial loan deferrals or debt forgiveness may be needed, or we will see a wave of insolvencies. Those who believe that Boris can flip a switch and "end the lockdown" may be very dissapointed with the results.
It's going to take excellent communications, excellent timing, and very high levels of competence in the delivery of either the vaccine or the quarantine system. This is the job that the government will end up being judged on.
The Cummings story is into the 'use bits of it to sneer at other people' phase, the BBC presenters are preventing their interviewees being interviewed as successfully as usual by interrupting every 3rd second, @Bobazina is possessed by the Ghost of Colonel Blimp (or Arthur Mee for heritage types) on telling everyone what pubs are for, and it's evil to learn to cook.
My trivial thought for all those media-warblers outraged about "How dare Cummings take his wife and child on a trip to check his eyesight, putting them at risk?"
Um - how was he supposed to get back home if it turned out to be faulty?
Roll on lunch.
I think we could all see real world changes before this story broke.
It is very difficult to open pubs and restaurants with a novel virus flying around. That doesn't mean I was sanguine about the effect this will have on the economy. I am however being realistic. Of course it will. Pubs and restaurants were closing before they were asked to by the government. For many, there will be no reopening - this is very sad for those involved, but better times will return and so will the sector, as their means of protection are not being destroyed as they would be in a war or a natural disaster. As ever, people who want the parts of the lockdown over or swiftly eased ignore the fact that the economy was heavily wounded before it, because of fear, and will be heavily wounded after it, because people's habits will change.
I've been able to cook perfectly adequately, thank you. But this time has made me realise that I was getting lazy and cooking the same dishes, or ordering the same takeaways, or going to mediocre restaurants (of which there were many) and its nice to have the time and opportunity to learn more.
Pubs are not the backbone of Britain. They are not the ultimate infrastructure. They're a pleasant, enjoyable means of drinking, eating and sometimes socialising. I love pubs and restaurants, and probably spend more time in them than most given my largely domestic travelling. But they're not the be all and end all. I'm likely going to be having far more dinner parties after this, and fewer pub trips. Its the people I miss, not the place.
https://twitter.com/Del_ivered/status/1265213525179408388?s=20
If his supporters turn on him it'd be news. That Labour voters are no longer supporting him isn't news.
Why??
The only logical explanation comes from professor Gupta at Oxford. There is a large reservoir of people for whom Corona is simply not a thing. They have immunity through genes or being exposed to other viruses.
Plus ca change
I and many others criticising him are also willing to say plenty of positive things about him. The mere fact that he is so influential to the govt shows his ability to control and organise. Ive said if he really needed time to rest in a more comfortable place for the good of the nation, communicated properly that would have been fine. It is the lies, taking us for mugs that is most offensive.
Think about it. In normal life, the number of cases is believed to double every 2 or 3 days. According to the ONS survey, there are currently something like 140,000 people infected.
On those figures, there would be 7 million cases within a fortnight.
The only thing that will prevent that is keeping at least some social distancing measures in place. In combination with tracking, tracing and isolating (!) cases. The better we can do at the latter, the more restrictions can be relaxed. But to suggest we can all go back to normal now, when we still have such a large number of cases, is sheer lunacy.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1265214138432831494
Of course, it may be unrepresentative, but New York found this:
It must be borne in mind that the age categories are of different widths: 0-19 is twice as wide as 45-54, for example, and 20-44 is 2-and-a-half times as wide.
So, adjusting for that and looking at the raw numbers, we have it that:
For those in my age category (45-55), my chance of being hospitalised by this is... exactly the same as for someone of 55-64, about three-quarters the chance of those from 65-74, and more than half that of someone of 75-84.
Hmm. That's not negligible, as you claimed. And seem to be still claiming.
For those of 20-44, they've got about a fifth the chance of being hospitalised as a 65-74-year-old, and about a sixth the chance of a 75-84-year old. Of the 2,449 hospitalised there, 705 were between 20-44.
The difference is that, with hospital support, they're far more likely to recover. Eventually, anyway. So as long as hospitals aren't overloaded, they should survive.
As I'm self-employed, if I end up in hospital and have a prolonged convalescence, as many people do, I'd be screwed. And I'm well under 60, and pretty fit and healthy, but my chances of being hospitalised by this thing are certainly not negligible.
Why do you keep insisting they are? Is it just something you want to be true, or do you have some good evidence otherwise? I'd love to be properly reassured here.
This has been an unmitigated disaster for Johnson's Gov't. It's absolutely gobsmacking to me and I can't quite believe my luck.
And when the only referent in your political toolbox is 'Black Wednesday OMG!', then everything looks like Black Wednesday.
What about all the political scandals that looked big at the time, but _didn't_ turn out to be Black Wednesday? Some critical thinking, please.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.22.20109850v1
There is limited information describing features and outcomes of patients requiring hospitalization for COVID19 disease and still no treatments have clearly demonstrated efficacy. Demographics and clinical variables on admission, as well as laboratory markers and therapeutic interventions were extracted from electronic Clinical Records (eCR) in 4712 SARS-CoV2 infected patients attending 4 public Hospitals in Madrid. Patients were stratified according to age and stage of severity. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, cut-off points that best discriminated mortality were obtained for each of the studied variables. Principal components analysis and a neural network (NN) algorithm were applied. A high mortality incidence associated to age >70, comorbidities (hypertension, neurological disorders and diabetes), altered vitals such as fever, heart rhythm disturbances or elevated systolic blood pressure, and alterations in several laboratory tests. Remarkably, analysis of therapeutic options either taken individually or in combination drew a universal relationship between the use of Cyclosporine A and better outcomes as also a benefit of tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids in critically ill patients. We present a large Spanish population-based study addressing factors influencing survival in current SARS CoV2 pandemic, with particular emphasis on the effectivity of treatments. In addition, we have generated an NN capable of identifying severity predictors of SARS CoV2. A rapid extraction and management of data protocol from eCR and artificial intelligence in-house implementations allowed us to perform almost real time monitoring of the outbreak evolution.
We can continue to wash hands and socially distance without being terrified.
You should follow Cummings' example and get out more.
If you do then you are a tribal loyalist more interested in the brand than performance, sad really.
Result would be no hit to ratings and other than twitter / guardian nobody caring about the weird bald bloke who got the sack.
3 months later, weird bald bloke comes back.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.20.20107813v1
Understanding the determinants of adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is critical for fighting the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assayed both antibody and T-cell reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigens in COVID-19 convalescent patients and healthy donors sampled before and during the pandemic. Our results show that while anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies can distinguish convalescent patients from healthy donors, the magnitude of T-cell response was more pronounced in healthy donors sampled during COVID-19 pandemic than in donors sampled before the outbreak. This hints at the possibility that some individuals have encountered the virus but were protected by T-cell cross-reactivity observed. A public and diverse T-cell response was observed for two A*02-restricted SARS-CoV-2 epitopes, revealing a set of T-cell receptor motifs displaying germline-encoded features. Bulk CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein S is characterized by multiple groups of homologous T-cell receptor sequences some of which are shared across multiple donors, indicating the existence of immunodominant epitopes. Overall, our findings indicate that T cells form an efficient response to SARS-CoV-2 and alongside the antibodies can serve as a useful biomarker for surveying SARS-CoV-2 exposure and immunity. We hope that data, including the set of specific T-cell receptors identified in this study can serve as a basis for future developments of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations and monitoring.,/i>
I predict a load of people are going to enjoy the summer, spend their wages like they are going back to work in September, then get a very nasty shock. And they won't be blaming themselves for this.
My guess something like
4.5 million return to status quo
1.5 million return with lower pay and or less hours
1.5 million extra unemployed
He's one of the sensible ones, who's said absolutely nothing on the subject and appears to be getting on with his day-job on the Science Committee.
The nation needs sport back PDQ.
It would be as convincing as Cherie Blair apologising for being a woolly brained little woman in the Peter Foster affair, despite being a QC.