I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
Tyson vs Roy Jones Jr confirmed in an exhibition. They're actually similiar size, height and age despite Tyson being a heavyweight (Yes I know RJJ went there briefly), I'm guessing it'll be at 180 lbs or some such.
Interesting that Priti Patel would beat everyone except Gove, Raab and Sunak.
Indeed, in my view Sunak is the likely next leader if Boris goes before the next general election or after the Tories win the next general election, Patel however is likely next leader if the Tories lose the next general election and Boris goes after the defeat (if the Tories lose Raab will likely have lost his seat anyway)
Win the next GE? Are we just not going to see financial chaos post-Covid, or will we have bounced back from the armageddon relatively unscathed, or will people just not notice they have no job, no livlihood and an uncertain future?
I am not going to blame the government for the economic hardship, but if not the incumbent who will be blamed? People like to blame someone, normally politicians.
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
Interesting that Priti Patel would beat everyone except Gove, Raab and Sunak.
Indeed, in my view Sunak is the likely next leader if Boris goes before the next general election or after the Tories win the next general election, Patel however is likely next leader if the Tories lose the next general election and Boris goes after the defeat (if the Tories lose Raab will likely have lost his seat anyway)
Win the next GE? Are we just not going to see financial chaos post-Covid, or will we have bounced back from the armageddon relatively unscathed, or will people just not notice they have no job, no livlihood and an uncertain future?
I am not going to blame the government for the economic hardship, but if not the incumbent who will be blamed? People like to blame someone, normally politicians.
Mate coming from me, really wouldn't predict anything for sure
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
Yes but if you could always rely on past form there would be no horse racing as everyone would figure out the results and the bookies would be out of business.
The relevant question is whether Trafalgar and Rasmussen are now over-sampling Trump supporters and without sight of the crosstabs I don't know.
If someone who tries to make a living on political betting can afford the Rasmussen crosstabs they would know if the sampling looks right or wrong. I can usually find anomalies in most polls once you get down to the sub-samples and knowing how much "fun" we had with Scottish sub-samples, it's better to keep some perspective.
Tyson vs Roy Jones Jr confirmed in an exhibition. They're actually similiar size, height and age despite Tyson being a heavyweight (Yes I know RJJ went there briefly), I'm guessing it'll be at 180 lbs or some such.
That is crazy. Part of Ali's decline with parkinsonism was due to continuing boxing too long, for one more payday and glory.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Hmm, it's a popular view that the UK is an easy target for money laundering, but is it really that easy nowadays?
To take one example from the header: Anyone can buy [London property] if they have the money. Up to a point, Ms Cyclefree. First they have to work around the fact that the estate agents, solicitors, and banks involved have to comply with the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 and other laws. These are pretty draconian nowadays.
In any case, all of this has virtually no connection with the appalling treatment of the Uighurs. There's a bit of a non-sequitur here.
Updated by the Money laundering and terrorist financing (amendment) regulations 2019.
Not that I'm bitter.
But for your original point, well...
If anyone thinks these Regulations are effective at stopping “dirty” money being used to buy property or much else besides, think again.
And as for the link with the Uighurs, Chinese money - some of it made from the exploitation and abuse of the Uighurs - is funding purchases and investments in Britain.
That's an interesting assessment. Not least because London might try to seize control of the process, which would be another barrel of lugworms entirely.
Accusing London of 'seizing control of the process' is one of the gamier recent nat lines. This is a power that the SNP campaigned not to have, and would give back, so it hardly has grounds for complaint if London does 'seize control'.
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
Does it not all boil down to the health service being able to cope with the ongoing infections at the same time as delivering normal service.
If we haven't yet been touched by the virus, sometimes the statistics appear only as numbers and not the personal heartache those who find themselves closer to the disease have to endure.
Thank you for the thoughtful word, my friend.
I can only sympathise with those who have lost family members as a result of this and seeing lines on a graph seems to further trivialise this.
I thought Spain, in having a national service of remembrance for the dead, struck the right chord. I'd like to think instead of bellicose rantings about "normality", we will take a moment to remember those who are no longer with us.
My brother is 100 miles away - it wouldn't matter if he were 100 yards away in truth. He lives in a small village and went to the local cafe in mid March and thinks he contracted the virus then. He first tested positive on March 31st and has now tested positive on three occasions and never tested negative.
I suspect the chemotherapy he underwent to treat cancer last year weakened his immune system which left him vulnerable to infection and unable to shift the virus once he got it.
I hope he will get over this and if there is a vaccine he will be a priority to receive it.
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
All that would be true... if we had no hope of a workable vaccine and/or improved treatements, both of which seem to be on the not too distant horizon.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
You are implying they will rise because of masks which is what has not happened here. The crumb of comfort in what we are seeing is far less ICU treatment and extremely low mortality.
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
I am living with it every day, with a professional risk, and a workplace where WFH and Social Distancing are near impossible. Handwashing, sanitiser and masks seem a reasonable way to shop to me. I have booked concert tickets for October, eaten in my local pub (v quiet) and had takeaways. All these are manageable risks. My eighty something parents with sound minds but damaged lungs are not going to be out spending any time soon. They are not idiots.
We don't have to do these things forever. There will be a vaccine at some point, and viruses do tend to become less severe with time.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
Hmm, it's a popular view that the UK is an easy target for money laundering, but is it really that easy nowadays?
To take one example from the header: Anyone can buy [London property] if they have the money. Up to a point, Ms Cyclefree. First they have to work around the fact that the estate agents, solicitors, and banks involved have to comply with the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 and other laws. These are pretty draconian nowadays.
In any case, all of this has virtually no connection with the appalling treatment of the Uighurs. There's a bit of a non-sequitur here.
Updated by the Money laundering and terrorist financing (amendment) regulations 2019.
Not that I'm bitter.
But for your original point, well...
If anyone thinks these Regulations are effective at stopping “dirty” money being used to buy property or much else besides, think again.
And as for the link with the Uighurs, Chinese money - some of it made from the exploitation and abuse of the Uighurs - is funding purchases and investments in Britain.
So what kind of draconian controls would you like, and how would you avoid making life more difficult for the 99% with 'clean' money and making the country as a whole poorer through your extreme fastidiousness?
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Starmer making the case for the Union is to win seats in England, not Scotland. That's the play.
If he can become hated by Sturgeon, even better
Hatred is not Sturgeon’s modus operandi. She fought Glasgow Labour for many long years before first winning. They taught her that hatred, in which they specialised (eg. George Galloway), was a one-way route to failure.
Starmer is welcome to make a case for the Union. I wish a Unionist occasionally would. Not seen one even try for several decades
Just a reminder, you lost in 2014
Indeed. Hatred won in 2014. Love lost.
I see very little love coming from nationalists
Indeed. I too see very little love coming from British nationalists.
The problem is this is not "normal" politics. It's about identity. Playing with fire.
It was a mistake handing the matches to Boris Johnson.
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
Starmer making the case for the Union is to win seats in England, not Scotland. That's the play.
If he can become hated by Sturgeon, even better
Hatred is not Sturgeon’s modus operandi. She fought Glasgow Labour for many long years before first winning. They taught her that hatred, in which they specialised (eg. George Galloway), was a one-way route to failure.
Starmer is welcome to make a case for the Union. I wish a Unionist occasionally would. Not seen one even try for several decades
Just a reminder, you lost in 2014
Yes, and remember it is winners' manifestos (Vote No to keep Scotland in the EU) that are put to the test afterwards.
They won and thought they could then discard the manifesto without consequences. They were wrong.
Good. One of the generally splendid SKS's misjudgements was to be photographed doing the knee thing and looking a prat. Interesting that most people don't care for it. It's only for the divine and HM the Queen as the divine's rep on earth (see discussion earlier today) IMHO, being a mark of submission. (So perhaps you could add bloke proposing to his intended, in the heat of the moment).
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
At least he lived long enough to see his Brexit dream realised.
To what end though? His dream (and the dream on many of his generation) is effectively being inflicted on the youth of this country.
The youth have no more right to have their way than any other age group. Not least because all the evidence is that as they get older they change their views - some might even say they grow up. Let them spend 30 years or more doing something of value and contributing to the country and then they can shout about having their way. By which time the chances are they will have changed their minds.
Extremely. Some of us - hello, isam! - are being proved spectacularly right about the folly of the hysterical submission to Wokeism that gripped the weak-minded several weeks ago, which is now being met with a distinct coolness amongst the general public.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
You are implying they will rise because of masks which is what has not happened here. The crumb of comfort in what we are seeing is far less ICU treatment and extremely low mortality.
How do you know it’s nothing to do with masks ?
I would agree that the virus does seem to be losing some of its potency in Europe. In the UK we are at around 4500 confirmed cases a week but hospital admissions with Covid are very low and most hospitals have few if any Covid patients.
That's an interesting assessment. Not least because London might try to seize control of the process, which would be another barrel of lugworms entirely.
Accusing London of 'seizing control of the process' is one of the gamier recent nat lines. This is a power that the SNP campaigned not to have, and would give back, so it hardly has grounds for complaint if London does 'seize control'.
Sorry but in this instance you are wrong. The ability to award quotas is one that the SNP already has. The fear - as expressed by Carynx - is that it will be taken away from them.
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
All that would be true... if we had no hope of a workable vaccine and/or improved treatements, both of which seem to be on the not too distant horizon.
If we are to take the medical experts seriously then this is all, indeed, true - regardless of the availability of vaccines and improved treatments. I won't cut and paste the direct quotes, just read this:
It looks like we're lumbered with the virus for a very long time. If that is the case, then a balance between controlling it and the numbers of fatalities that society is willing to stomach will need to be struck. Just as with those road traffic deaths, so with Covid deaths - society must decide to what degree it is willing to hobble itself in order to save lives.
The Government implemented the lockdown because it was terrified of predictions that 500,000 people would die otherwise and the healthcare system would collapse. Would it be willing to see the economy permanently crippled by endless social distancing and rolling local lockdowns if it thought that the measures were saving 5,000 lives per year? Probably not.
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
That link shows clearly no pollster other than Rasmussen had Clinton ahead by 2% in November 2016, the month of the election.
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
That's good to hear. Hopefully people in the UK will carry on adhering to the rules and recommendations as they have generally done so till now.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
At least he lived long enough to see his Brexit dream realised.
To what end though? His dream (and the dream on many of his generation) is effectively being inflicted on the youth of this country.
The youth have no more right to have their way than any other age group. Not least because all the evidence is that as they get older they change their views - some might even say they grow up. Let them spend 30 years or more doing something of value and contributing to the country and then they can shout about having their way. By which time the chances are they will have changed their minds.
Nothing whatever prevents the youth, or anyone else, organising and campaigning to join the EU. It just requires the patient use of the democratic and parliamentary process. and it is more worthwhile than complaining about the people who have successfully campaigned for Brexit. Perhaps they should learn from them.
Nicola Sturgeon knows that votes and decisions can be reversed. I don't agree with her but she knows how to fight.
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
Why are people wearing masks outside?
Probably because it is advisable not to keep handling them and take them on and off as you go between shops and enclosed places. Not rocket science really
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
That link shows clearly no pollster other than Rasmussen had Clinton ahead by 2% in November 2016, the month of the election.
It is your final poll that really counts
Wrong again:
McClatchy/Marist November 1–3, 46% - 44% Google Consumer Surveys November 1–7, 38% - 36% Fox News November 1–3, 45% - 43%
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Could you link me to the evidence for that please
There are loads of quotes from WHO scientists in March/April time that the public wearing masks could make the situation worse
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
It will take another three or four months for it to become apparent that the only choice we ever faced was to go back to normal and accept the risks, or face a complete meltdown.
For my brother, there is no "choice" as you call it. He is trapped by and with the virus and there are many like him.
It's not all about "economic meltdown" as you put it.
The Southern states of the USA, Brazil and now India are busy demonstrating what attempting going back to Normal means.
It demonstrates that people do not function economically normally in an unrestrained pandemic.
Eliminating the disease via immunisation or Track and Trace is the way back to economic and social normality. Its a bit shit, but that is the nature of disease, we cannot ignore it away.
Which begs the question, at what point is the degree of suppression sufficient to say that we will return to normal life and accept so many deaths per year, as we do with other diseases that are endemic to human beings?
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
All that would be true... if we had no hope of a workable vaccine and/or improved treatements, both of which seem to be on the not too distant horizon.
If we are to take the medical experts seriously then this is all, indeed, true - regardless of the availability of vaccines and improved treatments. I won't cut and paste the direct quotes, just read this:
It looks like we're lumbered with the virus for a very long time. If that is the case, then a balance between controlling it and the numbers of fatalities that society is willing to stomach will need to be struck. Just as with those road traffic deaths, so with Covid deaths - society must decide to what degree it is willing to hobble itself in order to save lives.
The Government implemented the lockdown because it was terrified of predictions that 500,000 people would die otherwise and the healthcare system would collapse. Would it be willing to see the economy permanently crippled by endless social distancing and rolling local lockdowns if it thought that the measures were saving 5,000 lives per year? Probably not.
'Living with it' is a bit meaningless in that context. We are still living with bubonic plague but it's hardly the same 'living with it' that medieval Europe experienced.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Could you link me to the evidence for that please
There are loads of quotes from WHO scientists in March/April time that the public wearing masks could make the situation worse
At least he lived long enough to see his Brexit dream realised.
To what end though? His dream (and the dream on many of his generation) is effectively being inflicted on the youth of this country.
The youth have no more right to have their way than any other age group. Not least because all the evidence is that as they get older they change their views - some might even say they grow up. Let them spend 30 years or more doing something of value and contributing to the country and then they can shout about having their way. By which time the chances are they will have changed their minds.
Nothing whatever prevents the youth, or anyone else, organising and campaigning to join the EU. It just requires the patient use of the democratic and parliamentary process. and it is more worthwhile than complaining about the people who have successfully campaigned for Brexit. Perhaps they should learn from them.
Nicola Sturgeon knows that votes and decisions can be reversed. I don't agree with her but she knows how to fight.
The problem is that we had the optimal membership arrangement with the EU - forged by decades of great British statesmanship and endeavour. That will never be available to us again, sacrificed as it was at the alter of Boris Johnson's career. The young have every right to feel helpless and doomed.
Indeed. But I was wondering if he was going to have a Cabinet meeting in a (reportedly) pseudonymously booked parish kirk hall in the midst of a wood in the more remote parts of Aberdeenshire, like Mrs May did.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
And whilst I am at it did the collapse of the Soviet Empire come from: (a) The inability of a command economy to compete with an innovative free market economy; (b) the pressure applied by Reagan's increase in the conventional capability of the US; (c) a combination of (a) and (b) or (d) Amnesty International's campaigns about prisoners of conscience?
The idea that the Chinese will be influenced by similar protests is almost funny, in a sad kind of way.
In the case of the Warsaw Pact it was a combination all 4. Read Timothy Garton Ash, for instance, or Havel to know that Western protests and help to dissidents did play a part, a small one, but a part anyway.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
Good. One of the generally splendid SKS's misjudgements was to be photographed doing the knee thing and looking a prat. Interesting that most people don't care for it. It's only for the divine and HM the Queen as the divine's rep on earth (see discussion earlier today) IMHO, being a mark of submission. (So perhaps you could add bloke proposing to his intended, in the heat of the moment).
You are over interpreting the tweet.
37% support taking the knee, 37% oppose and 25% don't care, if you look at the cross tabs.
It goes up to 43% approval for footballers to wear BLM patches.
We don't have to do these things forever. There will be a vaccine at some point, and viruses do tend to become less severe with time.
My entire response was to the suggestion that we should try to "eliminate" the virus, and the counter-suggestion from many eminent authorities that this is likely to prove impossible, even if and when useful vaccines begin to come on stream.
My concern is that we will, in fact, end up stuck with masks and social distancing forever, because we have arrived at the stage where so much of the population is so terrified of the virus (irrespective of their own personal risk of exposure or of becoming seriously ill) that any logical appreciation of risk has gone out of the window, and that therefore any number of deaths or even cases greater than zero will never be tolerated.
If we take it that Covid-19 will now always exist somewhere in the world at some time, then we will never be rid of either it or the attendant control measures. Even if we managed to crush every last case in the British Isles then we would need to turn our archipelago into a prison camp in the same manner as New Zealand to prevent reinfection from abroad; given the close proximity of continental Europe, the reliance for much of our trade on road hauliers and the steady stream of undocumented migrants, such a strategy is arguably impossible to implement even if it were deemed to be desirable to do so.
Masks everywhere. Social distancing everywhere. The old and the sick retreating into their homes and living out the remainder of their lives as voluntary shielders. That's where we're heading.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Could you link me to the evidence for that please
There are loads of quotes from WHO scientists in March/April time that the public wearing masks could make the situation worse
People say HFUYD is a font for polls but in my view he only posts polls that support his (narrow) agenda
Not really, I post polls with Biden ahead, I post polls with Trump ahead, I generally post most of the Yougov ones but not generic irrelavant ones like the one under discussion which tells us nothing much of interest.
However regardless it us up to me what I post not you (and please learn to spell my PB name correctly)
I went to London today, the first time for over four months. The train was nearly empty and 90% of those on it were wearing masks. In the centre of London about 80% just walking about (on very quiet streets) were wearing masks and taking care to keep distanced on pavements (except for the crowds outside of the Court where they were trying to get a glimpse of Johnny Depp). The one shop I went into was well organized and provided hand gel for customers as they entered. My club (the Reform) was organized with temperature checks and hand gel on arrival and a record of names. Lunch served in the garden at well spaced tables. I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
Why are people wearing masks outside?
I think that masks outside just repeats the message that the wearer is keeping alert; it also saves people the bother of taking a mask on and off. Mask wearing is routine in Korea, and whilst not absolutely proven are harmless at worst. I see no downside to their use as PART of the effort reduce transmission, along with hand washing and distancing.
People say HFUYD is a font for polls but in my view he only posts polls that support his (narrow) agenda
Not really, I post polls with Biden ahead, I post polls with Trump ahead, I generally post most of the Yougov ones but not generic irrelavant ones like the one under discussion which tells us nothing much of interest.
However regardless it us up to me what I post not you
I'm going to back HYFUD up here, he posts plenty of polls showing Biden with large leads. I'm probably more guilty than HYFUD of that charge
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
If mask wearing wasn't effective at preventing the spread disease, then surgeons wouldn't bother wearing them.
Nice comment! Masks are now mandatory in Spain and news cases doubled today to 2600. How is that evidence that wearing masks works. Surgeons wear a face fitted mask which is completely different to masks the public wears. It’s like saying wearing sunglasses is the same as wearing a welders mask.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
You don't sound like you hope you are wrong.
Of course I hope I’m wrong as if cases go up the government will force mask wearing every time you go outside which is the case in Spain at the moment.
I thought a couple of PBers who actually live in Spain told you you earlier that the rise in infections in Spain were mainly coming from situations where masks were still not worn, ie clusters from nightclubs. Are you ignoring that because it doesn't fit your agenda?
I’ll find some breakdowns tomorrow of where these outbreaks are coming from but off the top of my head
Night bars frequented by young people Family gatherings at home or in restaurants
The first infections in this wave came from meat processing plants.
In Spain you cannot go out without a mask on, if you do you face an instant fine. On the beach when you sunbathe you can remove the mask but as soon as you stand up you must put the mask on, yet cases are on the rise. I might be naive but I don’t see these results as evidence that mask wearing works.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
Don’t count your chickens
I’m not, we will follow Spain’s lead and make mask wearing mandatory and cases will rise
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
Why do you care about Scottish voting intention? According to you the politburo in London and the British armed forces are not going to allow independence irrespective of how we vote.
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
That link shows clearly no pollster other than Rasmussen had Clinton ahead by 2% in November 2016, the month of the election.
It is your final poll that really counts
Wrong again:
McClatchy/Marist November 1–3, 46% - 44% Google Consumer Surveys November 1–7, 38% - 36% Fox News November 1–3, 45% - 43%
Fox News final had Clinton up by 1% on 1st to 3rd November and by 4% in its final poll from 4th to 6th November.
Google Consumer Surveys was not on the link you sent and miles out in terms of actual voteshare.
I give you McClatchy Marist which was the only other pollster therefore comparable to Rasmussen in accuracy of its final poll
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
That is not the same point though. 59% of all Brits and 74% of Scots feel the United Kingdom is weaker over 5 years. It is hard to see that reversed by BoZos Clown car crash Brexit.
Scottish Independence now looks inevitable, the only questions are timing and how acrimonious.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Could you link me to the evidence for that please
There are loads of quotes from WHO scientists in March/April time that the public wearing masks could make the situation worse
Not true as RCS has pointed out to you. No doubt the odd scientist was saying that months ago but our information has increased and the advice has changed. Who is saying that now?
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
Kimberly Guilfoyle under fire for Trump fundraising disarray
Interviews depict an operation beset by departures, staffers with no prior fundraising experience and accusations of irresponsible spending.
FYI, Ms Guilfoyle is Don Jr's girlfriend (lucky lady!) who tested positive for you-know-what during 4th of July Trumpsky desecration of Mount Rushmore.
On that occasion, members of her staff were stranded in Rapid City ,SD under quarantine. Turns out being in the Heartland freaked these dweebles out.
"There are also questions about spending. In March, two staffers chose not to fly commercial and instead took the private jet of a major Trump donor to the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort for a finance event. The campaign had to reimburse the roughly $25,000 cost."
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
That link shows clearly no pollster other than Rasmussen had Clinton ahead by 2% in November 2016, the month of the election.
It is your final poll that really counts
Wrong again:
McClatchy/Marist November 1–3, 46% - 44% Google Consumer Surveys November 1–7, 38% - 36% Fox News November 1–3, 45% - 43%
Fox News final had Clinton up by 1% on 1st to 3rd November and by 4% in its final poll from 4th to 6th November.
Google Consumer Surveys was not on the link you sent and miles out in terms of actual voteshare.
I give you McClatchy Marist which was the only other pollster therefore comparable to Rasmussen in accuracy of its final poll
The Google number has a "will not vote" category, so it was actually very accurate as far as actual human behaviour.
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
Why do you care about Scottish voting intention? According to you the politburo in London and the British armed forces are not going to allow independence irrespective of how we vote.
When the Paras rampage through Holyrood like the Bogside in the Seventies, will the Regiment of Scotland oppose or support them?
Yet on actual polling all the indyref2 polls this year including Don't Knows have had Yes in a range of 43% to 50%, not vastly different from the 45% Yes got in 2014, not one single poll this year has had Yes over 50% once don't knows are included
That is not the same point though. 59% of all Brits and 74% of Scots feel the United Kingdom is weaker over 5 years. It is hard to see that reversed by BoZos Clown car crash Brexit.
Scottish Independence now looks inevitable, the only questions are timing and how acrimonious.
Well of course it is weaker, it has been weaker since Blair set up the Scottish Parliament without a comparable English Parliament, since the SNP won most seats at Holyrood in 2007 and a majority in 2011, since Yes got 45% in 2014 and the SNP got 50% in 2015. However there is little evidence Brexit has made much further difference bar a fractional difference of a few diehard Remainers who voted No in 2014 to Yes and indeed a few SNP backers who voted Yes in 2014 and Leave in 2016 have now shifted to No.
You are a diehard Remainer therefore thus must stick to the narrative that Brexit has led to a vast shift to a landslide victory for Yes to Scottish independence with no real evidence to back you up
I must confess I was beginning to wonder. As the Rasmussen crosstabs are behind a paywall (as are the Trafalgar ones), I simply don't know how their sampling is different from other pollsters but the current +2 lead for Biden sticks out like an outlier (as does the +15 lead from Quinnipiac).
The latter has now produced a +13 lead for Biden in Florida (51-38) while St Pete Polls has Biden ahead 50-44.
We also had the Hill/Harris X poll last evening - Biden leads 45-38 in that. The regional split has Biden up 45-39 in the North East which seems remarkably good for Trump and 45-38 in the Midwest which seems remarkably good for Biden. Biden up 50-32 in the West and 42-41 in the South.
Biden leads 47-37 among White voters (really?). Among men Biden leads 44-42 (really again?) and among women by 47-34.
Not at all convinced by this poll to be honest.
Should be pointed out in 2016 Rasmussen were the only pollster to correctly have a Hillary popular vote lead of 2% and Trafalgar group were the only pollster to have Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and Michigan
A quick scan of this shows that statement on Rasmussen to be fake news...
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
That link shows clearly no pollster other than Rasmussen had Clinton ahead by 2% in November 2016, the month of the election.
It is your final poll that really counts
Wrong again:
McClatchy/Marist November 1–3, 46% - 44% Google Consumer Surveys November 1–7, 38% - 36% Fox News November 1–3, 45% - 43%
Fox News final had Clinton up by 1% on 1st to 3rd November and by 4% in its final poll from 4th to 6th November.
Google Consumer Surveys was not on the link you sent and miles out in terms of actual voteshare.
I give you McClatchy Marist which was the only other pollster therefore comparable to Rasmussen in accuracy of its final poll
The Google Survey is the first entry in the three-way race section
You should know better than to be arguing the toss over those that got 2% versus those that showed 3% or 1% Clinton leads; they all had MOEs of 2-4% (aprart from the Google Survey, funnily enough).
The difference in the last four Rasmussen polls in the week before the election says nothing about the changing mood of the electorate or the refinement of their polling accuracy; it was all a reflection of MOE.
I hope I am wrong but I think the enforced mask wearing will make the Covid situation worse in the UK and that in 2 weeks new cases will be over 1000 per day. If face coverings were the solution then the WHO would have recommended them back in March but they didn’t. Countries where face coverings are far more prevalent than the UK are seeing rises in cases now and I fear we will be the same. Social distancing and hand washing have worked in the UK , Deaths are below average and the number of new cases is under control. There is no need for this change and I fear it will have the opposite of the desired effect.
How on earth is more people covering their faces going to make matters worse?
Cases will rise, there will be further lockdowns but it won't be the fault of mask wearers it will more likely be the fault of those Brits who are too bloody minded/selfish/ ignorant/idle to bother taking the minimal precautions.
We have bought the situation under control without masks. I have watched people who have worn masks over the past few weeks. They never stop touching their face and they forget about social distancing as they feel protected by the mask. If they worked then the WHO would have always recommended them.
We are learning about this virus all the time, it is new, and the WHO as well as most governments are most certainly now recommending wearing masks or making them obligatory.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
The WHO only recommended masks after political pressure, not medical evidence.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh9wso6bEAc
Says Swedens top virus man.
https://unherd.com/2020/07/swedens-anders-tegnell-judge-me-in-a-year/
La OMS avisa de que decidir dónde y con quién ir es actualmente una decisión de "vida o muerte"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsaO3v4SvwA
Is Facebook as important as it was? Most of my friends seem as bored with it as they got with friends reunited.
I am not going to blame the government for the economic hardship, but if not the incumbent who will be blamed? People like to blame someone, normally politicians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#After_convention_nominations
A fair few pollsters showed a 2% lead for Clinton in the run-up to the 2016 election. Most others showed leads for which the actual result fell within the MOE.
EDIT: Also, Rasmussen published 4 polls in the last week before the election showing Clinton +2%, Tied, Trump +3, and Tied.
The relevant question is whether Trafalgar and Rasmussen are now over-sampling Trump supporters and without sight of the crosstabs I don't know.
If someone who tries to make a living on political betting can afford the Rasmussen crosstabs they would know if the sampling looks right or wrong. I can usually find anomalies in most polls once you get down to the sub-samples and knowing how much "fun" we had with Scottish sub-samples, it's better to keep some perspective.
Family gatherings are allowed in the uk now and pubs are open and busy yet without forced mask wearing our new cases are less than Spain.
I dare say that most of us will have heard Professor Sir Jeremy Farrar's recent remarks, to the effect that we are likely to be living with Covid-19 for decades. I would venture to suggest that few of us wish to live with social distancing and habitual face mask use for the remainder of our lives. But that's the sort of existence we're going to end up having, and handing down to future generations, unless society is prepared to have a very uncomfortable conversation with itself about Covid-19 mortality rates.
Here's what an Oxford University website has to say about influenza:
"Influenza (flu) is a very common, highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It can be very dangerous, causing serious complications and death, especially for people in risk groups. In rare cases flu can kill people who are otherwise healthy. In the UK it is estimated that an average of 600 people a year die from complications of flu. In some years it is estimated that this can rise to over 10,000 deaths. Flu leads to hundreds of thousands of GP visits and tens of thousands of hospital stays a year."
So, would we regard annual deaths and hospitalisations on this scale as what we just have to get used to as we learn to live with this virus as well? Or more? Or less? Are we going to attempt to quantify an acceptable level of risk like we do with just about everything else in life - such as balancing the possibility of a nuclear accident against the benefits of maintaining Trident and Sizewell B, or not lowering the speed limit for road traffic to 5mph because we place a greater value on rapid road transportation than we do on the lives of road traffic accident victims - or is it going to be test and trace and isolate and distance and mask up forever?
And no, I'm not saying we should emulate Brazil or that the current restrictions and the attempts to suppress the virus are useless, but at some point soon this is a conversation that really needs to start happening. We can't ignore the disease away, but by the same token we can't ignore the need to find a more sustainable means of living with it, either.
And as for the link with the Uighurs, Chinese money - some of it made from the exploitation and abuse of the Uighurs - is funding purchases and investments in Britain.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1286363280416608262?s=09
We don't have to do these things forever. There will be a vaccine at some point, and viruses do tend to become less severe with time.
My experience mask wearers are, if anything, more cautious about distancing than those that can't be bothered to wear one.
They conspicuously didn’t as a group.
I didn't (and wouldn't have) venture onto the Tube, but buses looked quiet, and I walked from Ludgate Circus to Pall Mall and back.
Overall, people were being very Covid conscious and following the rules and common sense
Are you Yes yet Alan?
I would agree that the virus does seem to be losing some of its potency in Europe. In the UK we are at around 4500 confirmed cases a week but hospital admissions with Covid are very low and most hospitals have few if any Covid patients.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53488142
It looks like we're lumbered with the virus for a very long time. If that is the case, then a balance between controlling it and the numbers of fatalities that society is willing to stomach will need to be struck. Just as with those road traffic deaths, so with Covid deaths - society must decide to what degree it is willing to hobble itself in order to save lives.
The Government implemented the lockdown because it was terrified of predictions that 500,000 people would die otherwise and the healthcare system would collapse. Would it be willing to see the economy permanently crippled by endless social distancing and rolling local lockdowns if it thought that the measures were saving 5,000 lives per year? Probably not.
It is your final poll that really counts
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1286321036213080066?s=09
Nicola Sturgeon knows that votes and decisions can be reversed. I don't agree with her but she knows how to fight.
Probably because it is advisable not to keep handling them and take them on and off as you go between shops and enclosed places. Not rocket science really
McClatchy/Marist November 1–3, 46% - 44%
Google Consumer Surveys November 1–7, 38% - 36%
Fox News November 1–3, 45% - 43%
There is an enormous amount of scientific, anecdotal and correlative evidence that mask wearing is effective.
Here is the top Google link from April 2020 on mask wearing: https://www.cedars-sinai.org/newsroom/covid-19-update-should-you-wear-a-mask/
It references the CDC and other sources on mask wearing.
It was pretty clear from very early on that countries with high levels of mask wearing had lower transmission rates.
So, could we have a source for "loads of quotes" please?
I wrote about this before here - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/09/lets-talk-about-islamophobia/.
No reason for us not to do something however small.
If mask wearing wasn't effective at preventing the spread disease, then surgeons wouldn't bother wearing them.
37% support taking the knee, 37% oppose and 25% don't care, if you look at the cross tabs.
It goes up to 43% approval for footballers to wear BLM patches.
"Anti-wokism"* is a minority view too.
*perhaps wilful ignorance is a better term.
For instance, did you know that all those “Don’t Know” respondents are strong opponents of independence?
My concern is that we will, in fact, end up stuck with masks and social distancing forever, because we have arrived at the stage where so much of the population is so terrified of the virus (irrespective of their own personal risk of exposure or of becoming seriously ill) that any logical appreciation of risk has gone out of the window, and that therefore any number of deaths or even cases greater than zero will never be tolerated.
If we take it that Covid-19 will now always exist somewhere in the world at some time, then we will never be rid of either it or the attendant control measures. Even if we managed to crush every last case in the British Isles then we would need to turn our archipelago into a prison camp in the same manner as New Zealand to prevent reinfection from abroad; given the close proximity of continental Europe, the reliance for much of our trade on road hauliers and the steady stream of undocumented migrants, such a strategy is arguably impossible to implement even if it were deemed to be desirable to do so.
Masks everywhere. Social distancing everywhere. The old and the sick retreating into their homes and living out the remainder of their lives as voluntary shielders. That's where we're heading.
However regardless it us up to me what I post not you (and please learn to spell my PB name correctly)
Masks are now mandatory in Spain and news cases doubled today to 2600.
How is that evidence that wearing masks works.
Surgeons wear a face fitted mask which is completely different to masks the public wears. It’s like saying wearing sunglasses is the same as wearing a welders mask.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/
Nonetheless it is a fairly modest measure to reduce spread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_second_Scottish_independence_referendum#Opinion_polling
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/new-rules-on-junk-food-ads-could-threaten-uk-economic-recovery
What's the legal definition of junk food? (Hawaiian pizza, obviously but beyond that...?)
Google Consumer Surveys was not on the link you sent and miles out in terms of actual voteshare.
I give you McClatchy Marist which was the only other pollster therefore comparable to Rasmussen in accuracy of its final poll
Scottish Independence now looks inevitable, the only questions are timing and how acrimonious.
In Quebec in 1995 Yes to independence from Canada led the last 6 polls but No won 51% to 49% as Don't Knows went No
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Quebec_referendum
Kimberly Guilfoyle under fire for Trump fundraising disarray
Interviews depict an operation beset by departures, staffers with no prior fundraising experience and accusations of irresponsible spending.
FYI, Ms Guilfoyle is Don Jr's girlfriend (lucky lady!) who tested positive for you-know-what during 4th of July Trumpsky desecration of Mount Rushmore.
On that occasion, members of her staff were stranded in Rapid City ,SD under quarantine. Turns out being in the Heartland freaked these dweebles out.
"There are also questions about spending. In March, two staffers chose not to fly commercial and instead took the private jet of a major Trump donor to the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort for a finance event. The campaign had to reimburse the roughly $25,000 cost."
You are a diehard Remainer therefore thus must stick to the narrative that Brexit has led to a vast shift to a landslide victory for Yes to Scottish independence with no real evidence to back you up
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#Three-way_race
You should know better than to be arguing the toss over those that got 2% versus those that showed 3% or 1% Clinton leads; they all had MOEs of 2-4% (aprart from the Google Survey, funnily enough).
The difference in the last four Rasmussen polls in the week before the election says nothing about the changing mood of the electorate or the refinement of their polling accuracy; it was all a reflection of MOE.