Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
"Professor Karl Friston is a computer modelling expert, world-renowned for his contributions to neuroscience. He has been applying his "dynamic causal modelling" approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, and has reached some startling results.
- The differences between countries are not primarily down to government actions, but due to 'intrinsic' differences in the populations - We don't yet fully understand what is driving it, although there are theories ranging from levels of vitamin D to genetic differences - In each country, there appears to be a portion of the population that is 'not even in the game' - that is, not susceptible to Covid-19. This varies hugely between countries - In the UK, Professor Friston estimates that portion to be at least 50%, and probably more like 80% - The similar mortality results between Sweden (no lockdown) and the UK (lockdown) are best explained by the fact that in reality there was no difference - the impact of the legal lockdown in Professor Friston's models "literally goes away"."
The difficulty with that is that you have to explain how it is that preventing people having contact with other people would have no effect on virus transmission. It's a bit like the climate change deniers postulating lots of other reasons for changes in temperature but ignoring the well known (and easily demonstrated in a lab - or even at home) warming effects of CO2 and other greenhouse gases due to their absorption and re-emission profile for EM waves at the frequencies radiated by an object at the Earth's temperature. It's not enough to come up with other explanations, you need to explain why the extra CO2 in the atmosphere would not be leading to warming - i.e. what other effects are going to cancel it out.
On the other points: - intrinsic differences, quite possible - in genetics (likely some effects as there are for almost everything else health related), customs (how touchy-feely people are with each other, whether mask use is common) and climate (possibly directly, but more likely in influencing whether people are inside or outside when meeting up) - likely there are some immune people for whatever reason and varies by country but - 50%-80% is a massive leap. It's possible that a non-trivial number of people are immune, but we're lacking evidence for that and have some (limited so far) evidence for the contrary (i.e. very high infection rates in some known super-spreader events).
On the last point, we and other countries will surely keep easing lockdowns until as long as Rt seems to keep below 1. If it continues to keep below 1 whatever we do then the other possibilities (mass natural immunity/mass of people already infected and now immune) will have some evidence. Or the possibility of seasonal effects - we get to test that one next winter (and also by looking at other countries).
"Professor Karl Friston is a computer modelling expert, world-renowned for his contributions to neuroscience. He has been applying his "dynamic causal modelling" approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, and has reached some startling results.
- The differences between countries are not primarily down to government actions, but due to 'intrinsic' differences in the populations - We don't yet fully understand what is driving it, although there are theories ranging from levels of vitamin D to genetic differences - In each country, there appears to be a portion of the population that is 'not even in the game' - that is, not susceptible to Covid-19. This varies hugely between countries - In the UK, Professor Friston estimates that portion to be at least 50%, and probably more like 80% - The similar mortality results between Sweden (no lockdown) and the UK (lockdown) are best explained by the fact that in reality there was no difference - the impact of the legal lockdown in Professor Friston's models "literally goes away"."
People still haven't explained the huge intrinsic differences between Norwegians and Swedes. The only real differences (unless there are some very significant "intrinsic differences") are the lockdown
(Norway and Sweden 7-day averages for deaths; Norway scaled up by 1.906 to compare per capita with Sweden)
Good, but a bit surprised/discontented that New Zealand is not in that. they were one of the first if not the first, nation to to say not to China on 5G and new government introduced lows that in effect make it harder for China to by land or homes in New Zealand as one of their first thing when in office.
The man who drove 250 miles in a car with his infected wife and 4 year old son to the tax-avoiding second home he partly owns to have an unregistered babysitter on call who would have been committing an offence if they had to look after the child?
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
Is it a creature of some sort?
If I was to put a mental image on it, it would be a green and pleasant land.
"Professor Karl Friston is a computer modelling expert, world-renowned for his contributions to neuroscience. He has been applying his "dynamic causal modelling" approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, and has reached some startling results.
- The differences between countries are not primarily down to government actions, but due to 'intrinsic' differences in the populations - We don't yet fully understand what is driving it, although there are theories ranging from levels of vitamin D to genetic differences - In each country, there appears to be a portion of the population that is 'not even in the game' - that is, not susceptible to Covid-19. This varies hugely between countries - In the UK, Professor Friston estimates that portion to be at least 50%, and probably more like 80% - The similar mortality results between Sweden (no lockdown) and the UK (lockdown) are best explained by the fact that in reality there was no difference - the impact of the legal lockdown in Professor Friston's models "literally goes away"."
Trigger warning, along with pretty much anything from Oxon.
On the measure of lockdown stringency also produced by Oxford researchers Sweden and the UK are much more similar than you would think from the simplistic binary narrative. We are not as locked down as many other locked down economies, and their de facto changes in behaviour aren't much smaller than ours. In general, I tend to be sceptical of people who say that a phenomenon isn't caused by the obvious causal factor but by something else that they haven't actually been able to identify or quantify.
Perhaps, in which case we should open pubs and shops because their being closed clearly makes little difference?
That would be excellent news indeed given the number of recently confirmed major battery plant developments in Europe, and conspicuous absence of them here.
"Professor Karl Friston is a computer modelling expert, world-renowned for his contributions to neuroscience. He has been applying his "dynamic causal modelling" approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, and has reached some startling results.
- The differences between countries are not primarily down to government actions, but due to 'intrinsic' differences in the populations - We don't yet fully understand what is driving it, although there are theories ranging from levels of vitamin D to genetic differences - In each country, there appears to be a portion of the population that is 'not even in the game' - that is, not susceptible to Covid-19. This varies hugely between countries - In the UK, Professor Friston estimates that portion to be at least 50%, and probably more like 80% - The similar mortality results between Sweden (no lockdown) and the UK (lockdown) are best explained by the fact that in reality there was no difference - the impact of the legal lockdown in Professor Friston's models "literally goes away"."
People still haven't explained the huge intrinsic differences between Norwegians and Swedes. The only real differences (unless there are some very significant "intrinsic differences") are the lockdown
(Norway and Sweden 7-day averages for deaths; Norway scaled up by 1.906 to compare per capita with Sweden)
This may mot fully explain but two factors are:
1) diffuses in recording, Sweden recorded all deaths 'with' COVID, regardless of what is the main courses of death.
2) Stockroom is a much bigger urban conurbation than Oslo, and size of manger city's seams to be a factor.
but leaving those two things aside,
a) Sweden policy is designed for the long term, so we would expect it to look bad at this stage, that does not meen it will not look better in a few months or next year.
b) its is worth noting that PM of Norway has admitted that she implemented the lock=down as a 'out of fear' is now unlocking and copying the Swedish modal as she things it is better.
That would be excellent news indeed given the number of recently confirmed major battery plant developments in Europe, and conspicuous absence of them here.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
Is it a creature of some sort?
The problem is that he closes his eyes and thinks of England.
As everyone knows, anyone who does that is preparing to get screwed good and hard.
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
Clearly some form of risk segmentation is the way forward, details TBC.
Various models differ slightly but all segment into these broad groups
Group 1. Vulnerable (old/comorbid/obese/unfit)
Group 2. Fit, young, slim, healthy (no comorbidity, little or no contact with Groups 1 or 2)
Group 3. Demographically Group 2 but who for the nature of their job/family life are in close contact with Group 1 – eg frontline carers and health workers
As absolutely millions of Britons fall squarely into Group 2, it's not clear that endless lockdown for all groups is wise.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union...
It might; it might also be a sclerotic, hidebound England alongside the much larger and slightly more nimble Europe...
Seems like a complete non-starter. The EU isn't interested in watering down LPF. A line-by-line tariff negotiation will take multiple years when the UK's reddest line is no extension to negotiations.
I have trawled through google and Ipsos-Mori as best I can, and this is what I have found in terms of "has personality" polling. You can decide for yourself if it might be important or not.
I think it backs up my hypothesis that the dullard doesn't win the GE
Sep 03 Blair 23 IDS 3 Kennedy 16
Sep 04 Blair 22 Howard 7 Kennedy 11 (Tory led VI)
Aug 07 Brown 31 Cameron 42 Ming 9
Sep 13 Cameron 40 EdM 19 Clegg 25 (Lab led VI)
Sep 14 Cameron 39 EdM 20 Clegg 26
Sep 15 Cameron 41 Corbyn 41 Farron 18 Farage 66
Sep 16 May 37 Corbyn 32
Sep 17 May 21 Corbyn 47
Apr 18 May 16 Corbyn 39
Jun 19 Boris 79 Corbyn 22 Hunt 18 Farage 61 Sep 19 Boris 76 Corbyn 25
Jun 20 Boris 64 Starmer 30
Except Attlee on 1945 and 1951, Heath in 1970 and Major in 1992 as stated
What were the IPSOS-MORI polls on those occassions?
And the whole point of my theory is that it applies to the reality tv watching, instant gratification seeking, modern age. It doesn't matter that it wasn't the case in the distant past, in fact that is kind of what I am getting at. Things have changed, and the personality wins
I think it's very plausible that people rationalise an unconscious decision based on personality.
So if the Labour PM in 2010 had bested Cameron on that score it would have been rationalized after the event as "no time for a novice", "markets have failed, so why turn to the Tories", etc.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
Is it a creature of some sort?
If I was to put a mental image on it, it would be a green and pleasant land.
I think Trump is rather misreading the mood of the country by gloating about what a great day for the country and how great the news in the country is.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union...
It might; it might also be a sclerotic, hidebound England alongside the much larger and slightly more nimble Europe...
Possible but unlikely and if it is then the public can replace the government with a new one.
That would be excellent news indeed given the number of recently confirmed major battery plant developments in Europe, and conspicuous absence of them here.
Start with the certainty that "I must be allowed to be free of these restrictions." Rationalise it any way you can:
Rationalisation 1: There isn't a problem. The death rate hasn't even increased! Cite ONS stats that haven't yet been updated Rationalisation 2: There is a problem, but it's only killing those at death's door - those who "should" have died already. Cite the stats showing that we had a better-than-usual winter for deaths and indicate that these deaths are just a bit of "catching up" (Variant - those who died were due to die very soon anyway, very sad, never mind; ignore that the median expectancy for those dead was well over a decade) Rationalisation 3: There is a problem, but lockdown's not helping. Cite the fact that we've been locked down for several days already and the death rate hasn't come down yet Rationalisation 4: There is a problem, but lockdown didn't help. Switch instantly from "the death rate hasn't decreased yet; it would have done if lockdown helped" to "the death rate decreased too quickly for it to be lockdown." Ignore any discrepancy Rationalisation 5: There is a problem, but we could cope without lockdown. Cite Sweden. Ignore the differential death rate between it and its neighbours and insist that the only possible influence on the death rate is the lockdown and ignore all the other factors that influence infectivity and transmission (population density in urban areas, transport, connectivity, culture, environment). Rationalisation 6: There was a problem but it's all over. Cite a lone authority to claim that the death rate is one in ten thousand without bothering to work out that this means the death toll would have spiked at 6,700 in the UK. Rationalisation 7: There is/was a problem, but it's confined to oldies and fatties and the ill. Cite the death rate; gloss over hospitalisations and intensive care. Ignore that many younger, fitter, and healthier people get very ill but recover thanks to hospital help; imply that whatever demographic I am in is all-but-immune to this. Insist that this means that my demographic should be completely freed; ignore or gloss over both the issues of protecting the more vulnerable from me infecting them and killing them, or the potential problems of all my demographic getting ill and overwhelming the NHS.
We don't see Number 1 that often these days, but it was by far the most common early on.
This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
I have trawled through google and Ipsos-Mori as best I can, and this is what I have found in terms of "has personality" polling. You can decide for yourself if it might be important or not.
I think it backs up my hypothesis that the dullard doesn't win the GE
Sep 03 Blair 23 IDS 3 Kennedy 16
Sep 04 Blair 22 Howard 7 Kennedy 11 (Tory led VI)
Aug 07 Brown 31 Cameron 42 Ming 9
Sep 13 Cameron 40 EdM 19 Clegg 25 (Lab led VI)
Sep 14 Cameron 39 EdM 20 Clegg 26
Sep 15 Cameron 41 Corbyn 41 Farron 18 Farage 66
Sep 16 May 37 Corbyn 32
Sep 17 May 21 Corbyn 47
Apr 18 May 16 Corbyn 39
Jun 19 Boris 79 Corbyn 22 Hunt 18 Farage 61 Sep 19 Boris 76 Corbyn 25
Jun 20 Boris 64 Starmer 30
Except Attlee on 1945 and 1951, Heath in 1970 and Major in 1992 as stated
What were the IPSOS-MORI polls on those occassions?
And the whole point of my theory is that it applies to the reality tv watching, instant gratification seeking, modern age. It doesn't matter that it wasn't the case in the distant past, in fact that is kind of what I am getting at. Things have changed, and the personality wins
I think it's very plausible that people rationalise an unconscious decision based on personality.
So if the Labour PM in 2010 had bested Cameron on that score it would have been rationalized after the event as "no time for a novice", "markets have failed, so why turn to the Tories", etc.
The implication is that Trump will do a lot better than expected in November. Perhaps there are Independents who are telling the pollsters what they think they ought to say, but who will end up voting Trump over Biden when it comes to it.
You'd also expect the loss of Ruth Davidson to weigh heavily on the Scot Tories in the next Holyrood elections, and for Johnson to be irreplaceable for national Tory fortunes.
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
Clearly some form of risk segmentation is the way forward, details TBC.
Various models differ slightly but all segment into these broad groups
Group 1. Vulnerable (old/comorbid/obese/unfit)
Group 2. Fit, young, slim, healthy (no comorbidity, little or no contact with Groups 1 or 2)
Group 3. Demographically Group 2 but who for the nature of their job/family life are in close contact with Group 1 – eg frontline carers and health workers
As absolutely millions of Britons fall squarely into Group 2, it's not clear that endless lockdown for all groups is wise.
Yes, totaly agree, I could add a forth group:
Group 4 people who would otherwise be in group 3 but have already had the virus and passed an anybody test, who could act largely as if they are in group 2.
Talking of which, I would like it if a plan could be devised to find people who have passed the antibody test and give them jobs in care homes.
"Professor Karl Friston is a computer modelling expert, world-renowned for his contributions to neuroscience. He has been applying his "dynamic causal modelling" approach to the Covid-19 pandemic, and has reached some startling results.
- The differences between countries are not primarily down to government actions, but due to 'intrinsic' differences in the populations - We don't yet fully understand what is driving it, although there are theories ranging from levels of vitamin D to genetic differences - In each country, there appears to be a portion of the population that is 'not even in the game' - that is, not susceptible to Covid-19. This varies hugely between countries - In the UK, Professor Friston estimates that portion to be at least 50%, and probably more like 80% - The similar mortality results between Sweden (no lockdown) and the UK (lockdown) are best explained by the fact that in reality there was no difference - the impact of the legal lockdown in Professor Friston's models "literally goes away"."
People still haven't explained the huge intrinsic differences between Norwegians and Swedes. The only real differences (unless there are some very significant "intrinsic differences") are the lockdown
(Norway and Sweden 7-day averages for deaths; Norway scaled up by 1.906 to compare per capita with Sweden)
This may mot fully explain but two factors are:
1) diffuses in recording, Sweden recorded all deaths 'with' COVID, regardless of what is the main courses of death.
2) Stockroom is a much bigger urban conurbation than Oslo, and size of manger city's seams to be a factor.
but leaving those two things aside,
a) Sweden policy is designed for the long term, so we would expect it to look bad at this stage, that does not meen it will not look better in a few months or next year.
b) its is worth noting that PM of Norway has admitted that she implemented the lock=down as a 'out of fear' is now unlocking and copying the Swedish modal as she things it is better.
When your infections are close to zero, you can copy a model that gives an R number close to 1 very easily. Norway has all but extinguished Covid in their country.
Notice that they're not opening the border with Sweden. Danes can come in and out, but not Swedes.
Given that Norway could easily adapt to a new wave of infections by better tailoring their restrictions, it's difficult to see how Sweden could end up looking any better than them.
Hmm, that's on the Level NE of Bridgwater, in a prima facie flood risk area - and a look on the Gmt webite confirms this, though it's not currently designated [edit] as a high risk area. Some engineering needed, especially to allow for sea level rise and climate change.
I think Tesla are capable of some engineering if they do decide to go ahead though.
Oh yes indeed. They'd need some pretty heavy roadworks and rail link anyway, and decent foundations, so the extra wouldn't notice. But plenty of stone in the Mendip or even Dartmoor quarries such as Meldon (rail link).
I wonder if port access is intended - probably rail to Avonmouth rather than Bridgwater docks.
Avonmouth already handles a lot of cars, but you'd think it was on the wrong side for export to relatively close destinations (with the exception of Ireland).
Cambridge/PHE estimate for IFR is 0.88% [0.77%-1.00%]. Nasty.
Estimating 10% of England have had it, 17% in London, down to just 4% in the SW.
Peak day of infections was 23/march, with 362k new infections (ICL had 280k or so iirc). Currently at 17k/day - ICL would be way lower if they had continued updating, 5k or so.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Start with the certainty that "I must be allowed to be free of these restrictions." Rationalise it any way you can:
Rationalisation 1: There isn't a problem. The death rate hasn't even increased! Cite ONS stats that haven't yet been updated Rationalisation 2: There is a problem, but it's only killing those at death's door - those who "should" have died already. Cite the stats showing that we had a better-than-usual winter for deaths and indicate that these deaths are just a bit of "catching up" (Variant - those who died were due to die very soon anyway, very sad, never mind; ignore that the median expectancy for those dead was well over a decade) Rationalisation 3: There is a problem, but lockdown's not helping. Cite the fact that we've been locked down for several days already and the death rate hasn't come down yet Rationalisation 4: There is a problem, but lockdown didn't help. Switch instantly from "the death rate hasn't decreased yet; it would have done if lockdown helped" to "the death rate decreased too quickly for it to be lockdown." Ignore any discrepancy Rationalisation 5: There is a problem, but we could cope without lockdown. Cite Sweden. Ignore the differential death rate between it and its neighbours and insist that the only possible influence on the death rate is the lockdown and ignore all the other factors that influence infectivity and transmission (population density in urban areas, transport, connectivity, culture, environment). Rationalisation 6: There was a problem but it's all over. Cite a lone authority to claim that the death rate is one in ten thousand without bothering to work out that this means the death toll would have spiked at 6,700 in the UK. Rationalisation 7: There is/was a problem, but it's confined to oldies and fatties and the ill. Cite the death rate; gloss over hospitalisations and intensive care. Ignore that many younger, fitter, and healthier people get very ill but recover thanks to hospital help; imply that whatever demographic I am in is all-but-immune to this. Insist that this means that my demographic should be completely freed; ignore or gloss over both the issues of protecting the more vulnerable from me infecting them and killing them, or the potential problems of all my demographic getting ill and overwhelming the NHS.
We don't see Number 1 that often these days, but it was by far the most common early on.
This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
I don't find many PBers advocating many/any of these.
What I do find is people that are trying to debate interesting ideas for getting us out of this are often sidelined.
Yet ideas are what will get us out. Not clear to me why even suggesting things is so unpopular.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
The polling though shows while the median British voter backed Brexit they also prefer staying in the single market or a single market type deal (maybe just without free movement) to WTO terms Brexit.
WTO terms Brexit will have to be a great success to change that view
I couldn't care less what the polling says. We're 4 years to the General Election.
The government needs to do what it considers to be the right thing and seek the best for the nation as it sees it, then be judged accordingly. Quit harping on to polls as if they mean a single damned thing.
They are the primary thing your government looks at to develop policy. They matter for that reason alone. Of course they shouldnt, but then the country shouldnt have voted this lot in.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
The UK's not caved. We've said we want a Canadian style deal which includes some tariffs and a limited LPF.
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
Clearly some form of risk segmentation is the way forward, details TBC.
Various models differ slightly but all segment into these broad groups
Group 1. Vulnerable (old/comorbid/obese/unfit)
Group 2. Fit, young, slim, healthy (no comorbidity, little or no contact with Groups 1 or 2)
Group 3. Demographically Group 2 but who for the nature of their job/family life are in close contact with Group 1 – eg frontline carers and health workers
As absolutely millions of Britons fall squarely into Group 2, it's not clear that endless lockdown for all groups is wise.
Yes, totaly agree, I could add a forth group:
Group 4 people who would otherwise be in group 3 but have already had the virus and passed an anybody test, who could act largely as if they are in group 2.
Talking of which, I would like it if a plan could be devised to find people who have passed the antibody test and give them jobs in care homes.
Indeed I think some models do have a fourth group very much along the lines you describe
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
Alternative take (pure speculation on the facts you presented and quick skim of report): 1) People took short term advantage of easing to visit people they hadn't seen (close friends/family) and some returned to shared workplaces -> increase in cases, but people were still careful and didn't dash out to mix with complete strangers -> no further increase in transmission rate, curve levels out again 2) The people that people went to visit other people didn't go to visit granny or other vulnerable people (and the downward trend in deaths from lockdown decreasing prior infections)
So, 2 agrees with you, 1 is a bit different. Any restriction easing that keeps Rt below1 will still drop cases, lockdown should have Rt well below 1 so there is some scope for people doing more things and not increasing cases in the long term - so keeping Rt close to 1 rather than very rapidly acquired herd immunity is more likely explanation, I think - the latter would probably require intensive coronavirus parties.
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
I live in Georgia. For the first few days of openness it was a bit like waking from hibernation, and vaguely disbelieving it was actually happening, and the novelty of it.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
The variance by age is absolutely massive, everywhere. It's fairly dangerous for the over 70s, falling to extremely safe for the under 20s, with scale of risk that ramps up quickly past age 60 or so.
... This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
No-one is saying that. You've misunderstood Karl Friston's point, which is that as well as degree of lockdown and other known knowns (demographics etc), there seems to be an additional, unknown factor acting. As well as, not instead of.
Dunno if he's right, but prima facie the anomalously low Case Fatality Rate in Germany looks like a pretty strong indication that he might be. It looks too big an anomaly to be explained simply by the fact that they've done more tests than anywhere else (especially since they haven't!).
The variance by age is absolutely massive, everywhere. It's fairly dangerous for the over 70s, falling to extremely safe for the under 20s, with scale of risk that ramps up quickly past age 60 or so.
The quote I’ve seen is that, for adults, whatever your risk of dying was in a given year, catching Covid-19 roughly doubles that.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
The UK's not caved. We've said we want a Canadian style deal which includes some tariffs and a limited LPF.
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
You could spin anything. The UK has been pushing for a zero tarrif trade deal. The EU said they will give that with LPF. The UK has made concessions and the EU have just said, no:
... This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
No-one is saying that. You've misunderstood Karl Friston's point, which is that as well as degree of lockdown and other known knowns (demographics etc), there seems to be an additional, unknown factor acting. As well as, not instead of.
Dunno if he's right, but prima facie the anomalously low Case Fatality Rate in Germany looks like a pretty strong indication that he might be. It looks too big an anomaly to be explained simply by the fact that they've done a lot of tests.
The prevalence of coronavirus common cold is an obvious candidate for "dark matter". Problem is up till now noone cared about what type of common cold they previously had and there was very little value in studying it.
Has anybody else being following the US state of Georgia and its COVID states?
For background Georgia ended it Lock-down on 1st May, and replaced it with a stay-at-home-if-venerable. People there started to return to closer to normality, slowly at first but more so over time.
the number of recorded cases was on a downwind trend, that continued for a few days before 'bottoming out' on 9th May, and then increased to a second peak on the 19 may and has since then desecrated.
Deaths, meanwhile have continued to decline steadily.
My take,:
1) There was a second wave, but much smaller than most were expecting because they got to the new heard immunity quickly.
2) by keeping the venerable at home, they have largely avoided infection and thus the death rate has not been affected, at lest not significantly.
Caveats:
a) The increase in testing may account for some of the second wave.
b) There is both a delay between infection and death and death to reporting. but I still think if there was going to be a second big wave of deaths there would be some indication in the statistics by now.
I live in Georgia. For the first few days of openness it was a bit like waking from hibernation, and vaguely disbelieving it was actually happening, and the novelty of it.
How significant are the differences in behaviour post lockdown ? (For instance do people generally wear masks indoors; maintain distance etc ?)
One wonders which British industries the government is prepared to throw to the wolves. Have any details yet been disclosed of the areas where the government is volunteering tariffs?
Hmm, that's on the Level NE of Bridgwater, in a prima facie flood risk area - and a look on the Gmt webite confirms this, though it's not currently designated [edit] as a high risk area. Some engineering needed, especially to allow for sea level rise and climate change.
I think Tesla are capable of some engineering if they do decide to go ahead though.
Oh yes indeed. They'd need some pretty heavy roadworks and rail link anyway, and decent foundations, so the extra wouldn't notice. But plenty of stone in the Mendip or even Dartmoor quarries such as Meldon (rail link).
I wonder if port access is intended - probably rail to Avonmouth rather than Bridgwater docks.
Avonmouth already handles a lot of cars, but you'd think it was on the wrong side for export to relatively close destinations (with the exception of Ireland).
Indeed, they drive on the left still there in Ireland. And if one is thinking of Japan then it's fractionally more convenient than Felixstowe or Teesside (till the Arctic ice melts, of course). Maybe it really is intended for the Isles of Britain and Ireland market.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Cambridge/PHE equivalents - look at the figure for over 75s, jesus.
Yes, very high. What are the equivalents for other viral diseases?
By contrast, if you are under 50, the risks are very low (lower the young you are, to the point that they are statistically zero for the youngest groups).
The variance by age is absolutely massive, everywhere. It's fairly dangerous for the over 70s, falling to extremely safe for the under 20s, with scale of risk that ramps up quickly past age 60 or so.
The quote I’ve seen is that, for adults, whatever your risk of dying was in a given year, catching Covid-19 roughly doubles that.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
The UK's not caved. We've said we want a Canadian style deal which includes some tariffs and a limited LPF.
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
You could spin anything. The UK has been pushing for a zero tarrif trade deal. The EU said they will give that with LPF. The UK has made concessions and the EU have just said, no:
Will the UK walk away now? I'm willing to bet I know the answer.
Its such a shame you don't know what you're talking about. The EU have been pushing for a zero tariff deal with LPF, we've said no. They've said it must have the LPF to have zero tariffs so we've called their bluff and said fine not zero tariffs then.
The UK has repeatedly suggested to the EU that if the "zero tariff" deal is the barrier that the UK is willing to drop zero tariffs. The EU is the party not wanting to engage with that. See David Frost's letter to Barnier weeks ago.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/886168/Letter_to_Michel_Barnier_19.05.20.pdf You claim that we are being offered a future relationship of unprecedented depth. As I have set out, this is not obvious on the basis of the evidence we have so far. We have nevertheless suggested that, if it is the mutual commitment to zero tariffs that makes these provisions necessary in your eyes, then we would be willing to discuss a relationship that was based on less than that, as in other FTAs. You have said that you are not willing to have such discussions.
One wonders which British industries the government is prepared to throw to the wolves. Have any details yet been disclosed of the areas where the government is volunteering tariffs?
Agriculture.
Which would mean Northern Irish farmers would need to pay to export.
Hmm, that's on the Level NE of Bridgwater, in a prima facie flood risk area - and a look on the Gmt webite confirms this, though it's not currently designated [edit] as a high risk area. Some engineering needed, especially to allow for sea level rise and climate change.
I think Tesla are capable of some engineering if they do decide to go ahead though.
Oh yes indeed. They'd need some pretty heavy roadworks and rail link anyway, and decent foundations, so the extra wouldn't notice. But plenty of stone in the Mendip or even Dartmoor quarries such as Meldon (rail link).
I wonder if port access is intended - probably rail to Avonmouth rather than Bridgwater docks.
Avonmouth already handles a lot of cars, but you'd think it was on the wrong side for export to relatively close destinations (with the exception of Ireland).
PS And the site had a big water supply laid on for its explosives work - and rail link too, though that has been partly at least taken up:
... This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
No-one is saying that. You've misunderstood Karl Friston's point, which is that as well as degree of lockdown and other known knowns (demographics etc), there seems to be an additional, unknown factor acting. As well as, not instead of.
Dunno if he's right, but prima facie the anomalously low Case Fatality Rate in Germany looks like a pretty strong indication that he might be. It looks too big an anomaly to be explained simply by the fact that they've done more tests than anywhere else (especially since they haven't!).
Quite. I'm not sure how many of Friston's critics have watched the illuminating exposition of his views, which is an easy 34 minutes of viewing and is widely available – not least on here where it's been posted at least three times in as many days.
I think what Andy was objecting to was the tendency to magical thinking. If those arguing for rapid return to normal life at the same time accepted (for instance) the desirability of universal masking as a precaution, I would be more convinced by their arguments.
I am not enjoying the current restrictions either. It's possible that they could cost me my business - but a major recurrence in the autumn would be even more likely to do so.
Is anyone watching Trump, live on Sky at the moment? What a rambling incompetent, incoherent fool.
Currently ranting about how he knows stocks better than Warren Buffet.
You'll be approaching my level of Trumpophobia at this rate, Philip. And I hope you make it.
I'm past your level.
You're willing to relax and take on faith that Trump will be defeated in November. My level of loathing for Trump is so far past that, that even if he were polling 25% in the polls I wouldn't take anything for granted.
Like a monster in a horror movie, we can't turn our back and assume he won't revive, we need to see this atrocity metaphorically get a stake through the heart, be burnt to dust, whatever it takes.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Barnier's arrogance and attitude is going to collapse these talks
12 months ago I had this opinion and was considered extreme here for doing so. It seems to be becoming mainstream now.
....yet it is Johnson who hasn't stood by 4 statements he agreed to in the WA?....
That the Tories have lied consistently on Brexit for a number of years really shouldn't surprise anyone. Some things they wil get away with. Others will be less easy to explain away ... https://twitter.com/BBCCountryfile/status/1215284448129880066
I'm not surprised Barnier is pissed off with us. How can you negotiate with liars and cheats.
Barnier's problem, like many others, is he has not accepted we are leaving and wants to restrict the UK's ability to make it own laws and trade
So you believe that Britain should rat on commitments it signed up to last year?
The UK voted to leave, not to be tied to EU law on tax and state aid and were originally offered a Canada style deal
The EU in your words 'ratted' on it
There are no good outcomes here and as Germany takes over the EU presidency the word out of Germany that Merkel wants a deal and by September is promising
There is no point in extended the deadlock paying billions more into the EU
who offered a Canada style agreement\?
Barnier. On a number of occasions, right up until the day we said yes, that’s what we want too.
It is quite clear now that the EU will not do a Canada style FTA with us, even only for GB despite the concessions the Withdrawal Agreement made on our side for Northern Ireland.
The best we could get is a deal that leaves the customs union and ends free movement but keeps us under most of the single market rules otherwise.
Then walk away and not negotiate anything.
Then as independent equal partners we can start negotiations when they drop their hubris.
Independent does not mean equal. If the UK negotiates with Costa Rica, Costa Rica are not equals, the UK have more power.
Thucydides' observation 2,500 years ago, that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, is still lost on Leavers.
But strength doesn't just mean larger.
I think an independent, nimble, agile England would be stronger than a sclerotic, behemoth, unwieldy European Union.
I'm happy for Scotland etc to decide whether they tag along with us or join the sclerotic Union.
I'm curious what your mental image is when you close your eyes and think of England.
Is it a creature of some sort?
If I was to put a mental image on it, it would be a green and pleasant land.
The variance by age is absolutely massive, everywhere. It's fairly dangerous for the over 70s, falling to extremely safe for the under 20s, with scale of risk that ramps up quickly past age 60 or so.
A report presented to the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 12 February, when the UK was still actively tracing contacts of those infected with Covid-19, recommended a 10-fold increase in Public Health England’s test-and-trace capacity in order to extend the number of cases that could be managed.
“Scaling this response up, using for example a call-centre type system to support the local PHE teams, should be possible and feasible,” the experts from Public Health England and the University of Cambridge recommended.
However, this suggestion did not appear to be pursued and contact tracing was abandoned in March....
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
The UK's not caved. We've said we want a Canadian style deal which includes some tariffs and a limited LPF.
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
You could spin anything. The UK has been pushing for a zero tarrif trade deal. The EU said they will give that with LPF. The UK has made concessions and the EU have just said, no:
Will the UK walk away now? I'm willing to bet I know the answer.
When you're dealing with people who spin as a victory an act by the British prime minister that the British prime minister had earlier said no British prime minister would ever do...you know you won't get far with logical questions.
I think what Andy was objecting to was the tendency to magical thinking. If those arguing for rapid return to normal life at the same time accepted (for instance) the desirability of universal masking as a precaution, I would be more convinced by their arguments.
I am not enjoying the current restrictions either. It's possible that they could cost me my business - but a major recurrence in the autumn would be even more likely to do so.
I'm not sure @AndyJS was aiming his post at me, I have no idea whether he was or not.
In any case, it's a good piece you post – the small numbers thing is at the heart of much of it.
It was an absolutely stupid mistake Boris faffing around at the start, as I (and many others) said at the time.
The evidence from our international peers was clear.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Seems to fit with the anecdotal examples (the club in Seoul, the festival in Germany, the barman in the Italian alps).
How do we identify and isolate the super-spreaders?
It seems to be super-spreader events, rather than people who are intrinsically more contagious, if I'm reading it correctly. So it requires controls or bans on things like choirs, crowded noisy bars, etc.
Is anyone watching Trump, live on Sky at the moment? What a rambling incompetent, incoherent fool.
Currently ranting about how he knows stocks better than Warren Buffet.
You'll be approaching my level of Trumpophobia at this rate, Philip. And I hope you make it.
I'm past your level.
You're willing to relax and take on faith that Trump will be defeated in November. My level of loathing for Trump is so far past that, that even if he were polling 25% in the polls I wouldn't take anything for granted.
Like a monster in a horror movie, we can't turn our back and assume he won't revive, we need to see this atrocity metaphorically get a stake through the heart, be burnt to dust, whatever it takes.
Agreed. Trump is a danger to everyone: He’s perfectly capable of accidentally triggerring WWIII through shear incompetence & he’s going to cling on to power with every last breath. Until he’s been booted out of the presidency into orbit none of us are safe.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Seems to fit with the anecdotal examples (the club in Seoul, the festival in Germany, the barman in the Italian alps).
How do we identify and isolate the super-spreaders?
It seems to be super-spreader events, rather than people who are intrinsically more contagious, if I'm reading it correctly. So it requires controls or bans on things like choirs, crowded noisy bars, etc.
Large crowds with lots of screaming and shouting .....erhhh.. protests....
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Seems to fit with the anecdotal examples (the club in Seoul, the festival in Germany, the barman in the Italian alps).
How do we identify and isolate the super-spreaders?
Basic track and trace & isolate - along with limiting interactions in the environments in which it's likely to occur (nightclubs etc). Until we know considerably more about the virus, and/or have instantaneous accurate testing, that's about it.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
Seems to fit with the anecdotal examples (the club in Seoul, the festival in Germany, the barman in the Italian alps).
How do we identify and isolate the super-spreaders?
It seems to be super-spreader events, rather than people who are intrinsically more contagious, if I'm reading it correctly. So it requires controls or bans on things like choirs, crowded noisy bars, etc.
Preliminary research from Hong Kong found that around 20 per cent of COVID-19 sufferers are highly infectious, and responsible for 80 per cent of all transmissions.
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
So, what is it that makes the highly-infection people highly-infectious - or is it that everyone is highly-infectious for a short time, so where you happen to be during that short time is more important?
The answers to questions like these determine how quickly the world can recover.
... This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
No-one is saying that. You've misunderstood Karl Friston's point, which is that as well as degree of lockdown and other known knowns (demographics etc), there seems to be an additional, unknown factor acting. As well as, not instead of.
Dunno if he's right, but prima facie the anomalously low Case Fatality Rate in Germany looks like a pretty strong indication that he might be. It looks too big an anomaly to be explained simply by the fact that they've done more tests than anywhere else (especially since they haven't!).
Actually he said that Germany's low rate (of infections and deaths, rather than specifically CFR) is not due to superior testing. Logic suggests that it is surely at least partly due to that.
And surely it makes more sense to compare Sweden with its neighbours before deciding that lockdown has no effect?
And does Germany have an anomalously low CFR? There are loads of countries with similar or lower CFRs.
If you want to compare the UK and Germany, it looks like the main reason why there are more deaths in the UK is because more people were infected.
How is conceding a major part of your original requirements calling a bluff? That's not a sign of strength, its a sign of weakness.
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
The UK has been saying for a while we're prepared to have tariffs, the EU are the ones refusing to contemplate it. Its a sign of strength to be prepared to step away from the table.
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
The UK is not going to walk away from the table: it has just shown it will concede before it does that.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
The UK's not caved. We've said we want a Canadian style deal which includes some tariffs and a limited LPF.
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
You could spin anything. The UK has been pushing for a zero tarrif trade deal. The EU said they will give that with LPF. The UK has made concessions and the EU have just said, no:
Will the UK walk away now? I'm willing to bet I know the answer.
When you're dealing with people who spin as a victory an act by the British prime minister that the British prime minister had earlier said no British prime minister would ever do...you know you won't get far with logical questions.
Considering Boris negotiated what I always said he should negotiate in my discussions with you, why is that spin?
Comments
On the other points:
- intrinsic differences, quite possible - in genetics (likely some effects as there are for almost everything else health related), customs (how touchy-feely people are with each other, whether mask use is common) and climate (possibly directly, but more likely in influencing whether people are inside or outside when meeting up)
- likely there are some immune people for whatever reason and varies by country but
- 50%-80% is a massive leap. It's possible that a non-trivial number of people are immune, but we're lacking evidence for that and have some (limited so far) evidence for the contrary (i.e. very high infection rates in some known super-spreader events).
On the last point, we and other countries will surely keep easing lockdowns until as long as Rt seems to keep below 1. If it continues to keep below 1 whatever we do then the other possibilities (mass natural immunity/mass of people already infected and now immune) will have some evidence. Or the possibility of seasonal effects - we get to test that one next winter (and also by looking at other countries).
The only real differences (unless there are some very significant "intrinsic differences") are the lockdown
(Norway and Sweden 7-day averages for deaths; Norway scaled up by 1.906 to compare per capita with Sweden)
(did I get enough lefty tabloid-speak into that?)
What would yours be?
That would be excellent news indeed given the number of recently confirmed major battery plant developments in Europe, and conspicuous absence of them here.
1) diffuses in recording, Sweden recorded all deaths 'with' COVID, regardless of what is the main courses of death.
2) Stockroom is a much bigger urban conurbation than Oslo, and size of manger city's seams to be a factor.
but leaving those two things aside,
a) Sweden policy is designed for the long term, so we would expect it to look bad at this stage, that does not meen it will not look better in a few months or next year.
b) its is worth noting that PM of Norway has admitted that she implemented the lock=down as a 'out of fear' is now unlocking and copying the Swedish modal as she things it is better.
As everyone knows, anyone who does that is preparing to get screwed good and hard.
Interesting post, and interesting analysis.
Clearly some form of risk segmentation is the way forward, details TBC.
Various models differ slightly but all segment into these broad groups
Group 1. Vulnerable (old/comorbid/obese/unfit)
Group 2. Fit, young, slim, healthy (no comorbidity, little or no contact with Groups 1 or 2)
Group 3. Demographically Group 2 but who for the nature of their job/family life are in close contact with Group 1 – eg frontline carers and health workers
As absolutely millions of Britons fall squarely into Group 2, it's not clear that endless lockdown for all groups is wise.
So if the Labour PM in 2010 had bested Cameron on that score it would have been rationalized after the event as "no time for a novice", "markets have failed, so why turn to the Tories", etc.
I certainly hope so.
https://twitter.com/thomalexday/status/1268912878431744007
The UK have now demonstrated that they will do anything BUT walk away and so the EU can safely time them out until the end of year safe in the knowledge that the UK will budge in the end.
Bye bye zero tarrif trade deal. After June the haggling over the tarrifs begins and the UK started that process with a concession.
Sep 78
C 23 M 29
Apr 79
C 25 M 30
Maggie vs Foot
Jun 81
M 24 F11
May 82
M 24 F 9
Jan 83
M 27 F 7
Apr 83
M 47 F 7
May 83
M 41 F 9
Maggie vs Kinnock
Nov 83
M23 K30
Mar 84
M25 K35
Feb 85
M 20 K 18
Oct 85
M 19 K26
Jan 87
M 17 K23
Apr 87
M 24 K17
May 87
M 39 K36
Jun 87
M40 K38
Oct 87
M 26 K27
Jan 88
M 26 K24
Oct 88
M27 K22
Mar 89
M26 K21
Sep 89
M 28 K24
Feb 90
M 23 K23
Sep 90
M 24 K23
Rationalise it any way you can:
Rationalisation 1: There isn't a problem. The death rate hasn't even increased! Cite ONS stats that haven't yet been updated
Rationalisation 2: There is a problem, but it's only killing those at death's door - those who "should" have died already. Cite the stats showing that we had a better-than-usual winter for deaths and indicate that these deaths are just a bit of "catching up" (Variant - those who died were due to die very soon anyway, very sad, never mind; ignore that the median expectancy for those dead was well over a decade)
Rationalisation 3: There is a problem, but lockdown's not helping. Cite the fact that we've been locked down for several days already and the death rate hasn't come down yet
Rationalisation 4: There is a problem, but lockdown didn't help. Switch instantly from "the death rate hasn't decreased yet; it would have done if lockdown helped" to "the death rate decreased too quickly for it to be lockdown." Ignore any discrepancy
Rationalisation 5: There is a problem, but we could cope without lockdown. Cite Sweden. Ignore the differential death rate between it and its neighbours and insist that the only possible influence on the death rate is the lockdown and ignore all the other factors that influence infectivity and transmission (population density in urban areas, transport, connectivity, culture, environment).
Rationalisation 6: There was a problem but it's all over. Cite a lone authority to claim that the death rate is one in ten thousand without bothering to work out that this means the death toll would have spiked at 6,700 in the UK.
Rationalisation 7: There is/was a problem, but it's confined to oldies and fatties and the ill. Cite the death rate; gloss over hospitalisations and intensive care. Ignore that many younger, fitter, and healthier people get very ill but recover thanks to hospital help; imply that whatever demographic I am in is all-but-immune to this. Insist that this means that my demographic should be completely freed; ignore or gloss over both the issues of protecting the more vulnerable from me infecting them and killing them, or the potential problems of all my demographic getting ill and overwhelming the NHS.
We don't see Number 1 that often these days, but it was by far the most common early on.
This is a new one, I've got to say. It's a bit related to Number 5, but the contention that Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes are so intrinsically different as to have a variation of ten times in their vulnerability to this virus (rather than the difference being explained by Norwegians and Danes being less exposed to infection than Swedes) has got to be worth its own entry.
What a f***ing imbecilic evil **** ...
The EU with their trade surplus to the UK are the ones who've been insisting they want zero tariffs and that's the only type of deal they want to look at.
You'd also expect the loss of Ruth Davidson to weigh heavily on the Scot Tories in the next Holyrood elections, and for Johnson to be irreplaceable for national Tory fortunes.
Feb 91
M17 K18
Sep 91
M17 K16
Feb 92
M14 M19
Mar 92
M24 K33
Apr 92
M19 K31
*CHARISMA LOSES*
Group 4 people who would otherwise be in group 3 but have already had the virus and passed an anybody test, who could act largely as if they are in group 2.
Talking of which, I would like it if a plan could be devised to find people who have passed the antibody test and give them jobs in care homes.
Notice that they're not opening the border with Sweden. Danes can come in and out, but not Swedes.
Given that Norway could easily adapt to a new wave of infections by better tailoring their restrictions, it's difficult to see how Sweden could end up looking any better than them.
oh, it's a pun. go't it.
Jul-92 12-12
Sep-92 9-14
Feb-93 9-11
Mar-93 7-11
Jul-93 5-13
Feb-94 5-11
Major vs Blair
Sep-94 5-25
Feb-95 4-26
Sep-95 5-30
Feb-96 5-27
Oct-96 5-33
Mar-97 6-35
Estimating 10% of England have had it, 17% in London, down to just 4% in the SW.
Peak day of infections was 23/march, with 362k new infections (ICL had 280k or so iirc). Currently at 17k/day - ICL would be way lower if they had continued updating, 5k or so.
The original UK request was a zero tarrifs and quotas trade deal. The EU said that only comes with LPF.
The UK has come back with tarrifs (and maybe quotas), for less LPF. So yes they've caved and the EU haven't and the UK will therefore stay at the table regardless of what is offered as it has already proven.
Just lie back and think of England.
Currently ranting about how he knows stocks better than Warren Buffet.
What I do find is people that are trying to debate interesting ideas for getting us out of this are often sidelined.
Yet ideas are what will get us out. Not clear to me why even suggesting things is so unpopular.
Oct-97 50-5
Apr-98 42-5
Oct-98 40-4
Apr-99 37-5
Oct-99 32-6
Apr-00 32-5
Sep-00 21-5
Apr-01 24-5
Blair vs IDS
Nov-01 28-3
Sep-03 23-3
Blair vs Howard
Sep-04 22-7
Apr-05 22-6
Blair vs Cameron
Sep-06 22-19
Was the pun intentional?
May-10 3-24
Cameron vs Miliband
Sep 2013 40-19
Sep 2014 39-19
Apr 2015 40-20
Cameron vs Corbyn
Sep 2015 41-41
May vs Corbyn
Sep-16 37-32
Sep-17 21-47
Apr-18 16-39
Boris vs Corbyn
Jun-19 79-22
Sep-19 76-25
Boris vs Starmer
Jun-20 64-30
Coming back with some tariffs for less LPF meets what the UK has been seeking all along, not what the EU is seeking.
https://reason.com/2020/05/24/the-cdcs-new-best-estimate-implies-a-covid-19-infection-fatality-rate-below-0-3/
Alternative take (pure speculation on the facts you presented and quick skim of report):
1) People took short term advantage of easing to visit people they hadn't seen (close friends/family) and some returned to shared workplaces -> increase in cases, but people were still careful and didn't dash out to mix with complete strangers -> no further increase in transmission rate, curve levels out again
2) The people that people went to visit other people didn't go to visit granny or other vulnerable people (and the downward trend in deaths from lockdown decreasing prior infections)
So, 2 agrees with you, 1 is a bit different. Any restriction easing that keeps Rt below1 will still drop cases, lockdown should have Rt well below 1 so there is some scope for people doing more things and not increasing cases in the long term - so keeping Rt close to 1 rather than very rapidly acquired herd immunity is more likely explanation, I think - the latter would probably require intensive coronavirus parties.
Dunno if he's right, but prima facie the anomalously low Case Fatality Rate in Germany looks like a pretty strong indication that he might be. It looks too big an anomaly to be explained simply by the fact that they've done more tests than anywhere else (especially since they haven't!).
https://www.ft.com/content/bf3df5c5-dee2-4071-b201-32130111ce1c
Will the UK walk away now? I'm willing to bet I know the answer.
https://davidkatzmd.com/coronavirus-information-and-resources/
(For instance do people generally wear masks indoors; maintain distance etc ?)
However, 70 per cent of people infected with the virus do not pass it on to anyone else.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8391767/Super-spreaders-fuelling-coronavirus-pandemic.html
By contrast, if you are under 50, the risks are very low (lower the young you are, to the point that they are statistically zero for the youngest groups).
The UK has repeatedly suggested to the EU that if the "zero tariff" deal is the barrier that the UK is willing to drop zero tariffs. The EU is the party not wanting to engage with that. See David Frost's letter to Barnier weeks ago.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/886168/Letter_to_Michel_Barnier_19.05.20.pdf
You claim that we are being offered a future relationship of unprecedented
depth. As I have set out, this is not obvious on the basis of the evidence we have
so far. We have nevertheless suggested that, if it is the mutual commitment to
zero tariffs that makes these provisions necessary in your eyes, then we would be
willing to discuss a relationship that was based on less than that, as in other
FTAs. You have said that you are not willing to have such discussions.
Which would mean Northern Irish farmers would need to pay to export.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROF_Bridgwater
Here's another set, some of which you might well agree with:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/05/how-world-can-avoid-screwing-covid-19-response-again/
I think what Andy was objecting to was the tendency to magical thinking.
If those arguing for rapid return to normal life at the same time accepted (for instance) the desirability of universal masking as a precaution, I would be more convinced by their arguments.
I am not enjoying the current restrictions either. It's possible that they could cost me my business - but a major recurrence in the autumn would be even more likely to do so.
https://twitter.com/supermathskid/status/1268839857612259328
You're willing to relax and take on faith that Trump will be defeated in November. My level of loathing for Trump is so far past that, that even if he were polling 25% in the polls I wouldn't take anything for granted.
Like a monster in a horror movie, we can't turn our back and assume he won't revive, we need to see this atrocity metaphorically get a stake through the heart, be burnt to dust, whatever it takes.
How do we identify and isolate the super-spreaders?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/05/experts-told-uk-to-boost-covid-19-test-and-trace-in-february-papers-show
The government was advised to scale up its coronavirus test-and-trace effort using a call centre system as early as February, government documents show, raising questions about why the system launched last week as lockdown measures were eased is still not fully operational.
A report presented to the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 12 February, when the UK was still actively tracing contacts of those infected with Covid-19, recommended a 10-fold increase in Public Health England’s test-and-trace capacity in order to extend the number of cases that could be managed.
“Scaling this response up, using for example a call-centre type system to support the local PHE teams, should be possible and feasible,” the experts from Public Health England and the University of Cambridge recommended.
However, this suggestion did not appear to be pursued and contact tracing was abandoned in March....
In any case, it's a good piece you post – the small numbers thing is at the heart of much of it.
It was an absolutely stupid mistake Boris faffing around at the start, as I (and many others) said at the time.
The evidence from our international peers was clear.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/04/politics/electoral-map-2020-election-donald-trump-joe-biden/index.html
Until we know considerably more about the virus, and/or have instantaneous accurate testing, that's about it.
The answers to questions like these determine how quickly the world can recover.
And surely it makes more sense to compare Sweden with its neighbours before deciding that lockdown has no effect?
And does Germany have an anomalously low CFR? There are loads of countries with similar or lower CFRs.
If you want to compare the UK and Germany, it looks like the main reason why there are more deaths in the UK is because more people were infected.