Of course, in Debt of Honor, the National Security Advisor gets elevated to Vice President, and then rapidly becomes President (despite no previous political experience).
In this role (in Executive Orders) the new President has to deal with an imported pandemic, as well as right wing domestic terrorists.
Hmmm... that Tom Clancy might have been onto something.
My old boss never tired of reminding me that "There's no such thing as a secret Peter, someone always knows and someone always tells!" This has proved to be oh so true over many years and applying it to the identity of the Democratic nominee, the betting market is signalling very strongly that someone is already telling.
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
HEALTH WARNING
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92. It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
That 33-1 is much better value than 3-2 or worse to be Biden's VP pick.
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
HEALTH WARNING
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92. It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
Or one person pumping in alternating directions...
Test and trace - I think a problem with this is that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about what it involves. There is a belief that any individual contacted as a result of the scheme will have to self isolate for two weeks. The Govt urgently needs to improve its communications to make clear that this is not the case - being “traced” initially just involves being asked a series of questions to establish the circumstances in which you came into contact with the infected individual.
For the vast majority that will be as far as it goes as the contact may have been fleeting or basically non existent. Of course traced people may lie to avoid further sanctions, but one would hope that if they do, they at least take some precautions (even if not self isolating) when coming into contact with other people for the next couple of weeks.
As for the Daily Mail trying to turn “door knocking” into some sort of sinister move - despicable but entirely unsurprising. They would be the first with the headlines about test and trace (by phone) being ineffective, and are now first with the headlines complaining with steps being taken to improve on that.
What a stupid article. What is clearly an arbitrary “target” also clearly states in the text that it is “1000 ‘symptomatic’” +ve tests”, presumably on the basis that most symptomatic cases will be picked up by testing, but there will be an iceberg effect for non symptomatic cases. But (subject to correction) the testing regime isn’t limited to testing those with symptoms so the 1000 “target” quite probably hasn’t been breached anyway!
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
Problem is, there was research last week saying those >6 ft tall are twice as vulnerable because the virus tends to spread upwards.
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
HEALTH WARNING
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92. It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
My guess (at least at the time I reported this at the end of the last thread) is that Susan Rice shortened when someone misread a BBC profile that had been carelessly headlined, VP Pick: Susan Rice, and then lengthened as said punter laid off again on realising this was not news. It may be this happened more than once during the night.
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
HEALTH WARNING
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92. It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
My guess (at least at the time I reported this at the end of the last thread) is that Susan Rice shortened when someone misread a BBC profile that had been carelessly headlined, VP Pick: Susan Rice, and then lengthened as said punter laid off again on realising this was not news. It may be this happened more than once during the night.
Good point; one wonders how much money is actually being spent on what is for the UK anyway, a somewhat niche market.
And good morning everyone on what seems to be here a somewhat sticky and humid morning!
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
Problem is, there was research last week saying those >6 ft tall are twice as vulnerable because the virus tends to spread upwards.
Actual serious research, or somebody running a line through some data, finding a tiny anomaly suggesting 6fters are marginally over-represented among +ve tests, and the suggesting “upwards spreading” as a hypothetical explanation?
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
***** BETTING POST*****
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024. BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
HEALTH WARNING
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92. It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
My guess (at least at the time I reported this at the end of the last thread) is that Susan Rice shortened when someone misread a BBC profile that had been carelessly headlined, VP Pick: Susan Rice, and then lengthened as said punter laid off again on realising this was not news. It may be this happened more than once during the night.
Good point; one wonders how much money is actually being spent on what is for the UK anyway, a somewhat niche market.
And good morning everyone on what seems to be here a somewhat sticky and humid morning!
Many years ago I used to follow next manager football markets. It was amazing the wild swings (on the back of serious money) that could happen through people having “sightings” or misreading newspaper headlines.
A favourite was Terry Venables becoming very short odds for Newcastle manager. The punters weren’t wrong - problem is it was a team called Newcastle in Australia he got the job for...
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
Workplace test and trace systems might be a way forward, as used by the boffins at the Crick Institute. The Telegraph seems to have buried this piece overnight, perhaps because it is not deferential enough to HMG.
How Sir Paul Nurse got 1,200 scientists safely back to work with the 'easy' test and trace method Around 1,200 scientists are back at work, due to the success of the Institute's test and trace system
...
“We allow very few visitors,” Nurse’s PA tells me as she guides me to his office. “We test everybody every week,” he adds once I get there. “And in the three months we’ve been doing it, we’ve had just three infected people.” They got sent home, along with those at the Crick they came into contact with.
“Testing and tracing in a building is easy, just easy,” he insists. It is, he says with both satisfaction and impatience, a model of what could be done.
“There hasn’t been enough attention on how you defend the workplace,” he says. We have retreated too easily, he thinks, from the institutions of everyday life. “Now, I wouldn’t say that testing is cheap – but, then, it’s not been cheap sending everybody home.” ... “They could have had a 100,000 [daily] testing capacity [much sooner], which would have helped with the last peak,” he insists. “But they had got completely committed to the big laboratories, which could never have been put in place in time.” ...
The result he fears, looking back, is that – faced with shortages of everything from tests to humble face masks – policy was bent to fit capacity. ... As the Government “devised rules that allowed them to operate but didn’t contain the pandemic”, he notes, one of the first casualties was trust: trust not just between electors and elected, and between politicians and scientists. “It has all unravelled.” ... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/sir-paul-nurse-got-1200-scientists-safely-back-work-easy-test/
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
So shorter adults should be more vulnerable?
Shorter teachers in primary schools; taller adults in general.
ETA it would be interesting to know if the recent uptick which panicked the government was due to reopened schools rather than the second Eid which at the time had not yet happened.
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
So shorter adults should be more vulnerable?
Shorter teachers in primary schools; taller adults in general.
ETA it would be interesting to know if the recent uptick which panicked the government was due to reopened schools rather than the second Eid which at the time had not yet happened.
I was thinking more generally. The height of people walking about forms a peaked distribution (probably peaking somewhere around Boris's height) with young children at one end and tall mostly men at the other. Given that sneeze droplets in still air tend to sink, both extremes should bring some advantage whereas adults of shorter stature are in whatever the opposite of the sweet spot might be.
All assuming there is anything whatsoever in the OP's theory, of course.
Seems according to Trump the 1917 pandemic probably ended WWII because all soldiers got it.
How can anyone get so many things wrong in so few words.
Wouldn’t 100% rule out the possibility that this was deliberate. People laugh and focus on the error in saying WW2 instead of WW1, and the underlying claim (that Spanish flu helped end WW1) goes largely unchallenged. The suggestion being that allowing the spread of coronavirus might be leading to (unexpanded upon) “good outcomes”.
What a stupid article. What is clearly an arbitrary “target” also clearly states in the text that it is “1000 ‘symptomatic’” +ve tests”, presumably on the basis that most symptomatic cases will be picked up by testing, but there will be an iceberg effect for non symptomatic cases. But (subject to correction) the testing regime isn’t limited to testing those with symptoms so the 1000 “target” quite probably hasn’t been breached anyway!
Which is the key stat to monitor? Number of deaths or number of known new infections? I`d argue that both are flawed measures.
I think that the key metric is hospital admissions due to Covid.
If known infections rise but hospital admissions do not (allowing for a lag) then immunity is rising among people who have had symptoms which were not noticed or not serious enough for hospitalisation.
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
So shorter adults should be more vulnerable?
Shorter teachers in primary schools; taller adults in general.
ETA it would be interesting to know if the recent uptick which panicked the government was due to reopened schools rather than the second Eid which at the time had not yet happened.
I was thinking more generally. The height of people walking about forms a peaked distribution (probably peaking somewhere around Boris's height) with young children at one end and tall mostly men at the other. Given that sneeze droplets in still air tend to sink, both extremes should bring some advantage whereas adults of shorter stature are in whatever the opposite of the sweet spot might be.
All assuming there is anything whatsoever in the OP's theory, of course.
I think the new theory is that smaller, lighter virus-bearing droplets float while heavier droplets sink rapidly.
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
So shorter adults should be more vulnerable?
Shorter teachers in primary schools; taller adults in general.
ETA it would be interesting to know if the recent uptick which panicked the government was due to reopened schools rather than the second Eid which at the time had not yet happened.
That would be fairly easy to determine, wouldn’t it? The increase in cases would be heavily concentrated on people with school age children in relevant cohorts.
What a stupid article. What is clearly an arbitrary “target” also clearly states in the text that it is “1000 ‘symptomatic’” +ve tests”, presumably on the basis that most symptomatic cases will be picked up by testing, but there will be an iceberg effect for non symptomatic cases. But (subject to correction) the testing regime isn’t limited to testing those with symptoms so the 1000 “target” quite probably hasn’t been breached anyway!
Which is the key stat to monitor? Number of deaths or number of known new infections? I`d argue that both are flawed measures.
I think that the key metric is hospital admissions due to Covid.
If known infections rise but hospital admissions do not (allowing for a lag) then immunity is rising among people who have had symptoms which were not noticed or not serious enough for hospitalisation.
Or is just due to increased and/or better focussed testing.
Actual serious research, or somebody running a line through some data, finding a tiny anomaly suggesting 6fters are marginally over-represented among +ve tests, and the suggesting “upwards spreading” as a hypothetical explanation?
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
Actual serious research, or somebody running a line through some data, finding a tiny anomaly suggesting 6fters are marginally over-represented among +ve tests, and the suggesting “upwards spreading” as a hypothetical explanation?
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
No problem with that. Mine's a theory, pure and simple. I'm not suggesting any less. A hypothesis (not i think a totally ridiculous one given there does seem to be possible reason that Primary school children either don't get or aren't a worry for spreading the virus) chucked out there to be tested, validated or debunked. Might be valid might be not.
The other is put forward as counter evidence to my theory. Might be serious hard research which debunks it, or might simply be a blip in a sample set of data. Hence the question.
Man sacked for lying tells lies shock. Its a national priority apparently to get kids back to school. That a man sacked for lying thinks a man sacked for lying is the right person to persuade people its safe to go back speaks volumes about the utter contempt Dominic Cummings has for the British people.
OGH: " the winner is likely to stand a good chance of getting the nomination for President at WH2024".
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
I note that one of Harris’ political allies was recently reported as advising her to decline the VP slot on the grounds that it might kill her prospects for the Presidency in four years’ time.
While I think that a bit silly, I wouldn’t assume the VP gets the 2024 nomination, unless she actually replaces Biden during his term of office. The next four years are going to be pretty rough for an incoming administration, and there are likely to be several challengers for that nomination.
What a stupid article. What is clearly an arbitrary “target” also clearly states in the text that it is “1000 ‘symptomatic’” +ve tests”, presumably on the basis that most symptomatic cases will be picked up by testing, but there will be an iceberg effect for non symptomatic cases. But (subject to correction) the testing regime isn’t limited to testing those with symptoms so the 1000 “target” quite probably hasn’t been breached anyway!
Which is the key stat to monitor? Number of deaths or number of known new infections? I`d argue that both are flawed measures.
I think that the key metric is hospital admissions due to Covid.
If known infections rise but hospital admissions do not (allowing for a lag) then immunity is rising among people who have had symptoms which were not noticed or not serious enough for hospitalisation.
Or is just due to increased and/or better focussed testing.
Yes, that`s a contributory factor to the number of known infections - i.e. a bunch of unknown infections become known infections with no increase is actual infections overall.
Death stats are flawed due to the "died of versus died with" issue.
If you require hospital admission due to covid you have a serious infection which may lead to death or survival with a life-changing condition. This is the metric to be concerned about. Hospital admissions are not going up at the moment.
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
I read an article somewhere that some of the most expensive masks (ie. those used by cyclists) are bad because they are specifically designed to allow exhaling of bad stuff. Good for avoiding catching it though.
Man sacked for lying tells lies shock. Its a national priority apparently to get kids back to school. That a man sacked for lying thinks a man sacked for lying is the right person to persuade people its safe to go back speaks volumes about the utter contempt Dominic Cummings has for the British people.
Not just a liar but a Frank Spencer impersonator too!
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Or it could distribute them for free. Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
It's going to be an absolute bloodbath. And it's going to get even worse when furlough ends.
The winding up of the furlough scheme is the last opportunity companies have to off-load their employees and have the government pay their notice period...
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Workplace test and trace systems might be a way forward, as used by the boffins at the Crick Institute. The Telegraph seems to have buried this piece overnight, perhaps because it is not deferential enough to HMG.
How Sir Paul Nurse got 1,200 scientists safely back to work with the 'easy' test and trace method Around 1,200 scientists are back at work, due to the success of the Institute's test and trace system
...
“We allow very few visitors,” Nurse’s PA tells me as she guides me to his office. “We test everybody every week,” he adds once I get there. “And in the three months we’ve been doing it, we’ve had just three infected people.” They got sent home, along with those at the Crick they came into contact with.
“Testing and tracing in a building is easy, just easy,” he insists. It is, he says with both satisfaction and impatience, a model of what could be done.
“There hasn’t been enough attention on how you defend the workplace,” he says. We have retreated too easily, he thinks, from the institutions of everyday life. “Now, I wouldn’t say that testing is cheap – but, then, it’s not been cheap sending everybody home.” ... “They could have had a 100,000 [daily] testing capacity [much sooner], which would have helped with the last peak,” he insists. “But they had got completely committed to the big laboratories, which could never have been put in place in time.” ...
The result he fears, looking back, is that – faced with shortages of everything from tests to humble face masks – policy was bent to fit capacity. ... As the Government “devised rules that allowed them to operate but didn’t contain the pandemic”, he notes, one of the first casualties was trust: trust not just between electors and elected, and between politicians and scientists. “It has all unravelled.” ... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/sir-paul-nurse-got-1200-scientists-safely-back-work-easy-test/
My thought is that one of the reasons that everything's such a mess is that very few in Government are really focussing on what is needed to get everyday life returning to something akin to normal and focussing hard on what is needed to do that in every environment at an acceptable level of risk.
Fundamentally there is no point in having "COVID safe" workplaces, schools, shops or social venues, if the measures put in place cannot make those places viable to deliver what they exist for. A "COVID" safe workplace that reduces capacity by 90% is not viable. A school that can only operate at 50% capacity is not viable etc etc.
So either measures have to be devised (whether that's due to rapid testing on entry or whatever) that allow places to operate at viable capacity, or more focus needs to be put on outcomes. What level of COVID infection is acceptable, what are the dangers, can measures be taken to encourage high levels of infection but good/acceptable clinical outcomes (the viral load stuff which we've been talking about since the beginning but still seems to be largely ignored in Government guidance).
It seems to me that one of the problems we have (due in part to the poor quality of our political leaders) is that on the one hand we have scientists advising them who are focussed almost entirely on advising how to combat COVID-19. But whereas a competent government would be capable of combining that advice with putting together an overall framework for the country to move forward, but accepting the limitations of the advice, they instead flip flop between claiming science is determing their every move, whilst simply dismissing anything that is uncomfortable.
Leading to farcical situations like yesterday where the Education secretary is massively overplaying scientific "evidence" to justify opening schools, only for the scientists the next day to completely rubbish the way he is using such evidence. Whereas a competent approach might have been to take the good bits (evidence re: primary schools) but look for other solutions (rapid testing on entry etc) for secondary schools. And by drawing distinctions in this way it would be much easier to retain the confidence of scientists for not misusing data, and parents and the public.
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Or it could distribute them for free. Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
Imagine the headlines though. Their answer will be to leave them rotting in a warehouse until the vaccine is out, then bury them underground and hope everyone has forgotten.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
We couldn't really do a worse job of making them feel welcome. We treat them like shit on the bottom of our shoe.
I dont think thats accurate at all, we certainly could have done better in making them feel welcome, but your statement is hyperbole to the point of being meaningless.
People will have left for two main reasons, people feel safer at "home" during a crisis, and for those who have come for jobs and opportunity there is no longer such a benefit being in the UK, at least for the moment. Those factors will be far far more significant than feelings about the welcome from the government or from people generally.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Not just the US. TikTok had 600m users in India, and was of far more economic importance to its users, before it was banned.
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Or it could distribute them for free. Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
Imagine the headlines though. Their answer will be to leave them rotting in a warehouse until the vaccine is out, then bury them underground and hope everyone has forgotten.
Why ? If they are more than adequate for public use, they should be used.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Not just the US. TikTok had 600m users in India, and was of far more economic importance to its users, before it was banned.
Its not like we dont know where protectionism ends. Agree its not just the US, applies to nearly all the big global economies, including the EU. Once it has taken root somewhere big it becomes contagious.
It's going to be an absolute bloodbath. And it's going to get even worse when furlough ends.
The winding up of the furlough scheme is the last opportunity companies have to off-load their employees and have the government pay their notice period...
...still Boris was out campaigning with his bow and arrows yesterday, so all is well.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Not just the US. TikTok had 600m users in India, and was of far more economic importance to its users, before it was banned.
Its not like we dont know where protectionism ends. Agree its not just the US, applies to nearly all the big global economies, including the EU. Once it has taken root somewhere big it becomes contagious.
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Or it could distribute them for free. Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
Imagine the headlines though. Their answer will be to leave them rotting in a warehouse until the vaccine is out, then bury them underground and hope everyone has forgotten.
Why ? If they are more than adequate for public use, they should be used.
Of course they "should" be, and yours is a very good suggestion. But I am pretty confident this govt wont let "should" override avoiding a week of bad media headlines as the press take the mickey for buying dud masks from one of their cronies who had no experience in PPE. (Or perhaps he is a fellow Oxford PPE grad and the govt buyer thought that sufficient relevant experience).
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
Actual serious research, or somebody running a line through some data, finding a tiny anomaly suggesting 6fters are marginally over-represented among +ve tests, and the suggesting “upwards spreading” as a hypothetical explanation?
Headline in one of the papers saying that older pupils are as likely to spread the virus as adults (in “blow” to the Govt). Still reckon my theory’s a runner - ie. primary school children don’t spread the virus efficiently to adults (and vice versa) because they spend most of their time at a different height to them!
So the hypothesis that I built upon Alex's - that shorter people might be at greater risk - holds if the virus is spread principally by heavier sneeze droplets and the like. But there's a view that this isn't the case.
Under the alternative transmission route of smaller droplets hanging about in the air for longer periods, it isn't obvious why walking along with your head around six foot above ground would be any greater risk than at five foot or four foot? And as you highlight, the UK and US apparent correlations with height are contradictory.
I've been working every day since March, fuck you Daily Mail
No no no, they want people back at "work". As in the office. So that they can spend £10 a day on coffee and a danish and waste hours of their lives and £5k a year commuting into town. Thats proper work. What they actually do in the office is less important than keeping foreign investors office portfolios up and Starbucks not paying their taxes.
I've been working every day since March, fuck you Daily Mail
No no no, they want people back at "work". As in the office. So that they can spend £10 a day on coffee and a danish and waste hours of their lives and £5k a year commuting into town. Thats proper work. What they actually do in the office is less important than keeping foreign investors office portfolios up and Starbucks not paying their taxes.
I wonder how many Daily Mail reporters are working from their offices?
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
Fair point. But arrogance is antithetical to good science, and Cummings lacks the scientific training to mitigate his.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Which is no great loss to the world. Until the Chinese play by the same rules as everyone else then we should be limiting the amount of business we do with them to the absolute minimum.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Not just the US. TikTok had 600m users in India, and was of far more economic importance to its users, before it was banned.
Its not like we dont know where protectionism ends. Agree its not just the US, applies to nearly all the big global economies, including the EU. Once it has taken root somewhere big it becomes contagious.
Doesn't it end with World War 2?
Safe to say WW2 is unlikely this time around. A spiral of declining living standards, rising international tensions and a scramble for access to key natural resources certainly increases risks of armed conflicts between the various blocs, but the nuclear factor makes proxy wars and prolonged trade wars the likely destination rather than all out conflict this time.
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
I was going to comment that I've met plenty of arrogant good scientists, but then reflected that - if truly good - they're not actually arrogant, just correct about their abilities
So I think @Nigelb is probably right, but because when scientists become arrogant they cease to be good scientists - good scientists should question everything, including (and perhaps particularly), their own knowledge and abilities.
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
Fair point. But arrogance is antithetical to good science, and Cummings lacks the scientific training to mitigate his.
The quote that comes to mind "Oh, you sweet, summer child". But that would be rude.
Some years ago, an academic I knew joined an oil company.
When it came to arrogance, back stabbing etc he outdid everyone. Soared up the rungs.
I wasn't surprised since I'd seen him and his fellows in action..
Read up on the history of science. It is never pretty reading.....
The intersection between the sets of nice & great scientists seems to be empty.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Which is no great loss to the world. Until the Chinese play by the same rules as everyone else then we should be limiting the amount of business we do with them to the absolute minimum.
Same rules as everyone else? Good idea, if only there was a term for such a basis for trade. Level playing field perhaps? Even better we could all sign up to the rules more formally as part of a trading bloc.
This is people who have lost their jobs. Furloughed are still employed - for now...
From those I know - they are loosing their jobs. They are heading home, because it is cheaper/better to be unemployed in your "home" country.
Especially when you consider renting in London/UK vs returning to the family home/home you own outright in your home town/village.
A number, who still have their jobs, are WF(Country) - why be in London, when you can spend a month on the Black Sea coast in summer?
The reverse is also true. I read a piece in (IIRC) Costa Blanca News about British migrants who have had to shutter their costa bar doing a moonlight flit and just leaving the country. A major problem for the (often also British migrant) property agents who then have a right old job repossessing the property.
Again with furlough - its imminent winding up will create an avalanche of business failures and redundancies. Just as we're seeing incidences of the rona increasing as the country gets freed up and people start doing the hokey-cokey again spreading it all about.
Seems according to Trump the 1917 pandemic probably ended WWII because all soldiers got it.
How can anyone get so many things wrong in so few words.
Wouldn’t 100% rule out the possibility that this was deliberate. People laugh and focus on the error in saying WW2 instead of WW1, and the underlying claim (that Spanish flu helped end WW1) goes largely unchallenged. The suggestion being that allowing the spread of coronavirus might be leading to (unexpanded upon) “good outcomes”.
I think that is a stretch. I go with occams razor and that he is an idiot.
And of course it wasn't just 2 errors. He went for the hat-trick
This is people who have lost their jobs. Furloughed are still employed - for now...
From those I know - they are loosing their jobs. They are heading home, because it is cheaper/better to be unemployed in your "home" country.
Especially when you consider renting in London/UK vs returning to the family home/home you own outright in your home town/village.
A number, who still have their jobs, are WF(Country) - why be in London, when you can spend a month on the Black Sea coast in summer?
Movement of this scale could have a significant impact on our peak unemployment post Covid. A lot, although by no means all, EU workers were in hospitality, retail and the service sectors all of which are particularly badly hit. The more skilled ones are more likely to have secure employment.
Why is President Trump trying to ban TikTok? I get the national security issues around Huawei. But TikTok is a silly video sharing site, right?
Its a trade war. Being anti TikTok is very popular amongst the Brexiteer right, who have forgotten what a free market looks like. If Chinese companies cant collect data like a customers name, age, phone number and email without being a security risk it is essentially a ban on Chinese companies being successful in the US.
Which is no great loss to the world. Until the Chinese play by the same rules as everyone else then we should be limiting the amount of business we do with them to the absolute minimum.
Same rules as everyone else? Good idea, if only there was a term for such a basis for trade. Level playing field perhaps? Even better we could all sign up to the rules more formally as part of a trading bloc.
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
Fair point. But arrogance is antithetical to good science, and Cummings lacks the scientific training to mitigate his.
My favourite quote about science: “Many a beautiful theory has been destroyed by a single ugly fact”.
Closely followed by “When I started studying Chemistry I thought it was a mass of unrelated facts. I later came to realise it is a mass of unrelated theories.”
... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
Good scientists aren’t arrogant, so that’s a wish unlikely to be granted.
How many scientists have you met? If the arrogant ones aren't good, there goes half the people with an FRS....
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
I was going to comment that I've met plenty of arrogant good scientists, but then reflected that - if truly good - they're not actually arrogant, just correct about their abilities
So I think @Nigelb is probably right, but because when scientists become arrogant they cease to be good scientists - good scientists should question everything, including (and perhaps particularly), their own knowledge and abilities.
Just look at the story about the discovery of how many stomach ulcers are caused by infections..... All the arrogance and blind belief that "Me Big Scientist. Me Right." that you could ever need.
A chap I knew did 3 years of a PhD. At the very end, he disproved his idea. He could have hidden that, probably got his PhD. He was honest. So he got nothing.
Me personally, I would have given him a PhD on the spot. He did science. A carefully crafted, elegant proof, complete with a ton of evidence, of the negative is a valuable thing.
Workplace test and trace systems might be a way forward, as used by the boffins at the Crick Institute. The Telegraph seems to have buried this piece overnight, perhaps because it is not deferential enough to HMG.
How Sir Paul Nurse got 1,200 scientists safely back to work with the 'easy' test and trace method Around 1,200 scientists are back at work, due to the success of the Institute's test and trace system
...
“We allow very few visitors,” Nurse’s PA tells me as she guides me to his office. “We test everybody every week,” he adds once I get there. “And in the three months we’ve been doing it, we’ve had just three infected people.” They got sent home, along with those at the Crick they came into contact with.
“Testing and tracing in a building is easy, just easy,” he insists. It is, he says with both satisfaction and impatience, a model of what could be done.
“There hasn’t been enough attention on how you defend the workplace,” he says. We have retreated too easily, he thinks, from the institutions of everyday life. “Now, I wouldn’t say that testing is cheap – but, then, it’s not been cheap sending everybody home.” ... “They could have had a 100,000 [daily] testing capacity [much sooner], which would have helped with the last peak,” he insists. “But they had got completely committed to the big laboratories, which could never have been put in place in time.” ...
The result he fears, looking back, is that – faced with shortages of everything from tests to humble face masks – policy was bent to fit capacity. ... As the Government “devised rules that allowed them to operate but didn’t contain the pandemic”, he notes, one of the first casualties was trust: trust not just between electors and elected, and between politicians and scientists. “It has all unravelled.” ... Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/sir-paul-nurse-got-1200-scientists-safely-back-work-easy-test/
My thought is that one of the reasons that everything's such a mess is that very few in Government are really focussing on what is needed to get everyday life returning to something akin to normal and focussing hard on what is needed to do that in every environment at an acceptable level of risk.
Fundamentally there is no point in having "COVID safe" workplaces, schools, shops or social venues, if the measures put in place cannot make those places viable to deliver what they exist for. A "COVID" safe workplace that reduces capacity by 90% is not viable. A school that can only operate at 50% capacity is not viable etc etc.
So either measures have to be devised (whether that's due to rapid testing on entry or whatever) that allow places to operate at viable capacity, or more focus needs to be put on outcomes. What level of COVID infection is acceptable, what are the dangers, can measures be taken to encourage high levels of infection but good/acceptable clinical outcomes (the viral load stuff which we've been talking about since the beginning but still seems to be largely ignored in Government guidance).
It seems to me that one of the problems we have (due in part to the poor quality of our political leaders) is that on the one hand we have scientists advising them who are focussed almost entirely on advising how to combat COVID-19. But whereas a competent government would be capable of combining that advice with putting together an overall framework for the country to move forward, but accepting the limitations of the advice, they instead flip flop between claiming science is determing their every move, whilst simply dismissing anything that is uncomfortable.
Leading to farcical situations like yesterday where the Education secretary is massively overplaying scientific "evidence" to justify opening schools, only for the scientists the next day to completely rubbish the way he is using such evidence. Whereas a competent approach might have been to take the good bits (evidence re: primary schools) but look for other solutions (rapid testing on entry etc) for secondary schools. And by drawing distinctions in this way it would be much easier to retain the confidence of scientists for not misusing data, and parents and the public.
Very good analysis. We should concede that it's difficult to do, but it doesn't appear that there is a systematic attempt across Government to do it.
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Or it could distribute them for free. Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
Imagine the headlines though. Their answer will be to leave them rotting in a warehouse until the vaccine is out, then bury them underground and hope everyone has forgotten.
Why ? If they are more than adequate for public use, they should be used.
Of course they "should" be, and yours is a very good suggestion. But I am pretty confident this govt wont let "should" override avoiding a week of bad media headlines as the press take the mickey for buying dud masks from one of their cronies who had no experience in PPE. (Or perhaps he is a fellow Oxford PPE grad and the govt buyer thought that sufficient relevant experience).
I do have a slight theory that some free trade nutters think wealth creation is being a more respectable Arthur Daley middleman rather than creating anything useful at either end of the exchange.
That said there are now new PPE factories coming on line with government support:
Factories in South Wales and Lancashire have started making "high quality" face coverings as part of a push to produce a million a week.
Some £14m is being invested by the UK government, with productions underway in Port Talbot and Blackburn.
The Cabinet Office said 10 production lines had been bought, including 34 tons of equipment and machinery, while a further 10 had been commissioned from Coventry-based automotive company Expert Tooling and Automation Ltd.
Comments
In this role (in Executive Orders) the new President has to deal with an imported pandemic, as well as right wing domestic terrorists.
Hmmm... that Tom Clancy might have been onto something.
This has proved to be oh so true over many years and applying it to the identity of the Democratic nominee, the betting market is signalling very strongly that someone is already telling.
But as ever, be sure to DYOR.
Indeed so and all the more so if that "winner" is by then already in place as POTUS which is not an unlikely assumption.
Those who share my view above and are prepared to take a longer term view might like to join me in backing Susan Rice to be elected POTUS in 2024.
BETFRED is the only bookie currently offering this market where they have Ms Rice on offer at a seemingly not ungenerous price of 33/1, yeah ... Double Carpet!
DYOR.
Before jumping in as regards backing Susan Rice, please be advised that in the last HALF HOUR Kamala Harris has shortened to 2.56 to again become favourite to get the Dem VP Nomination, whilst Susan Rice has eased out to 2.92.
It seems therefore that there might be two people "telling"!
For the vast majority that will be as far as it goes as the contact may have been fleeting or basically non existent. Of course traced people may lie to avoid further sanctions, but one would hope that if they do, they at least take some precautions (even if not self isolating) when coming into contact with other people for the next couple of weeks.
As for the Daily Mail trying to turn “door knocking” into some sort of sinister move - despicable but entirely unsurprising. They would be the first with the headlines about test and trace (by phone) being ineffective, and are now first with the headlines complaining with steps being taken to improve on that.
What a stupid article. What is clearly an arbitrary “target” also clearly states in the text that it is “1000 ‘symptomatic’” +ve tests”, presumably on the basis that most symptomatic cases will be picked up by testing, but there will be an iceberg effect for non symptomatic cases. But (subject to correction) the testing regime isn’t limited to testing those with symptoms so the 1000 “target” quite probably hasn’t been breached anyway!
F1: hmm. Verstappen's win price has declined from 6.5 to 5.5.
Edited extra bit: he's also 15 for the title, which will drop like a stone if he actually does win the race.
And good morning everyone on what seems to be here a somewhat sticky and humid morning!
https://twitter.com/jdportes/status/1293067545570926593?s=21
https://twitter.com/jdportes/status/1293068746127482880?s=21
If “Post pandemic” is after FoM ends....
A favourite was Terry Venables becoming very short odds for Newcastle manager. The punters weren’t wrong - problem is it was a team called Newcastle in Australia he got the job for...
This might make things worse for students en masse if it means the whole system grinds to a halt. It would be better to encourage universities to make rapid acceptances across the board. Reduced pressure from overseas and home deferrers can do the rest.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-second-wave-lockdown-schools-cases-update/
https://twitter.com/LinkeviciusL/status/1293055918586953730?s=20
How Sir Paul Nurse got 1,200 scientists safely back to work with the 'easy' test and trace method
Around 1,200 scientists are back at work, due to the success of the Institute's test and trace system
...
“We allow very few visitors,” Nurse’s PA tells me as she guides me to his office. “We test everybody every week,” he adds once I get there. “And in the three months we’ve been doing it, we’ve had just three infected people.” They got sent home, along with those at the Crick they came into contact with.
“Testing and tracing in a building is easy, just easy,” he insists. It is, he says with both satisfaction and impatience, a model of what could be done.
“There hasn’t been enough attention on how you defend the workplace,” he says. We have retreated too easily, he thinks, from the institutions of everyday life. “Now, I wouldn’t say that testing is cheap – but, then, it’s not been cheap sending everybody home.”
...
“They could have had a 100,000 [daily] testing capacity [much sooner], which would have helped with the last peak,” he insists. “But they had got completely committed to the big laboratories, which could never have been put in place in time.”
...
The result he fears, looking back, is that – faced with shortages of everything from tests to humble face masks – policy was bent to fit capacity.
...
As the Government “devised rules that allowed them to operate but didn’t contain the pandemic”, he notes, one of the first casualties was trust: trust not just between electors and elected, and between politicians and scientists. “It has all unravelled.”
...
Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor famous for his championing of data-driven insights, is “obviously very interested in science - but I don’t think he knows much about how it actually works. It would be better for him and for us if he did.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/sir-paul-nurse-got-1200-scientists-safely-back-work-easy-test/
How can anyone get so many things wrong in so few words.
ETA it would be interesting to know if the recent uptick which panicked the government was due to reopened schools rather than the second Eid which at the time had not yet happened.
Secondary school pupils are likely to transmit coronavirus as easily as adults, according to official research used by ministers to argue that it is safe for all children to return to class next month.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/older-pupils-spread-virus-like-adults-5ts6jr2pp (£££)
All assuming there is anything whatsoever in the OP's theory, of course.
I think that the key metric is hospital admissions due to Covid.
If known infections rise but hospital admissions do not (allowing for a lag) then immunity is rising among people who have had symptoms which were not noticed or not serious enough for hospitalisation.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-which-face-covering-works-best-scientists-test-14-and-find-one-actually-increases-risk-of-infection-12046715
Since HMG has spaffed £100 million on the wrong type of mask for the NHS, it can probably turn a profit by selling them to the public.
Looks like real research.
https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-tall-people/
seems to accept the correlation is real.
The other is put forward as counter evidence to my theory. Might be serious hard research which debunks it, or might simply be a blip in a sample set of data. Hence the question.
It's going to be an absolute bloodbath. And it's going to get even worse when furlough ends.
While I think that a bit silly, I wouldn’t assume the VP gets the 2024 nomination, unless she actually replaces Biden during his term of office. The next four years are going to be pretty rough for an incoming administration, and there are likely to be several challengers for that nomination.
Death stats are flawed due to the "died of versus died with" issue.
If you require hospital admission due to covid you have a serious infection which may lead to death or survival with a life-changing condition. This is the metric to be concerned about. Hospital admissions are not going up at the moment.
Was it that they were surgical type masks with ear loops rather than ties ? In which case they are more than adequate for use outside of hospitals.
The almost useless face coverings are simple bandanas.
What have you done to them ?
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1293016987690389504
Keir needs to make inroads into this quickly. EHRC will be a good place to start.
Fundamentally there is no point in having "COVID safe" workplaces, schools, shops or social venues, if the measures put in place cannot make those places viable to deliver what they exist for. A "COVID" safe workplace that reduces capacity by 90% is not viable. A school that can only operate at 50% capacity is not viable etc etc.
So either measures have to be devised (whether that's due to rapid testing on entry or whatever) that allow places to operate at viable capacity, or more focus needs to be put on outcomes. What level of COVID infection is acceptable, what are the dangers, can measures be taken to encourage high levels of infection but good/acceptable clinical outcomes (the viral load stuff which we've been talking about since the beginning but still seems to be largely ignored in Government guidance).
It seems to me that one of the problems we have (due in part to the poor quality of our political leaders) is that on the one hand we have scientists advising them who are focussed almost entirely on advising how to combat COVID-19. But whereas a competent government would be capable of combining that advice with putting together an overall framework for the country to move forward, but accepting the limitations of the advice, they instead flip flop between claiming science is determing their every move, whilst simply dismissing anything that is uncomfortable.
Leading to farcical situations like yesterday where the Education secretary is massively overplaying scientific "evidence" to justify opening schools, only for the scientists the next day to completely rubbish the way he is using such evidence. Whereas a competent approach might have been to take the good bits (evidence re: primary schools) but look for other solutions (rapid testing on entry etc) for secondary schools. And by drawing distinctions in this way it would be much easier to retain the confidence of scientists for not misusing data, and parents and the public.
People will have left for two main reasons, people feel safer at "home" during a crisis, and for those who have come for jobs and opportunity there is no longer such a benefit being in the UK, at least for the moment. Those factors will be far far more significant than feelings about the welcome from the government or from people generally.
TikTok had 600m users in India, and was of far more economic importance to its users, before it was banned.
If they are more than adequate for public use, they should be used.
I've been working every day since March, fuck you Daily Mail
The behaviour of people after they get the title professor reminds me of Keegan's comment about generals. Some Pentagon desk jockey get one star - immediately he thinks "I am a general - an equal to Alexander the Great and Napoleon"....
Under the alternative transmission route of smaller droplets hanging about in the air for longer periods, it isn't obvious why walking along with your head around six foot above ground would be any greater risk than at five foot or four foot? And as you highlight, the UK and US apparent correlations with height are contradictory.
But arrogance is antithetical to good science, and Cummings lacks the scientific training to mitigate his.
From those I know - they are loosing their jobs. They are heading home, because it is cheaper/better to be unemployed in your "home" country.
Especially when you consider renting in London/UK vs returning to the family home/home you own outright in your home town/village.
A number, who still have their jobs, are WF(Country) - why be in London, when you can spend a month on the Black Sea coast in summer?
So I think @Nigelb is probably right, but because when scientists become arrogant they cease to be good scientists - good scientists should question everything, including (and perhaps particularly), their own knowledge and abilities.
Some years ago, an academic I knew joined an oil company.
When it came to arrogance, back stabbing etc he outdid everyone. Soared up the rungs.
I wasn't surprised since I'd seen him and his fellows in action..
Read up on the history of science. It is never pretty reading.....
The intersection between the sets of nice & great scientists seems to be empty.
Again with furlough - its imminent winding up will create an avalanche of business failures and redundancies. Just as we're seeing incidences of the rona increasing as the country gets freed up and people start doing the hokey-cokey again spreading it all about.
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-08-10/freelance-itv-news-journalist-wilson-li-arrested-in-hong-kong-under-security-law
And of course it wasn't just 2 errors. He went for the hat-trick
Closely followed by “When I started studying Chemistry I thought it was a mass of unrelated facts. I later came to realise it is a mass of unrelated theories.”
A chap I knew did 3 years of a PhD. At the very end, he disproved his idea. He could have hidden that, probably got his PhD. He was honest. So he got nothing.
Me personally, I would have given him a PhD on the spot. He did science. A carefully crafted, elegant proof, complete with a ton of evidence, of the negative is a valuable thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment comes to mind....
When the history of the COVID epidemic is written up, I am quite certain that there will a large amount of "Me Big Scientist. Me Right." in the story.
That said there are now new PPE factories coming on line with government support:
Factories in South Wales and Lancashire have started making "high quality" face coverings as part of a push to produce a million a week.
Some £14m is being invested by the UK government, with productions underway in Port Talbot and Blackburn.
The Cabinet Office said 10 production lines had been bought, including 34 tons of equipment and machinery, while a further 10 had been commissioned from Coventry-based automotive company Expert Tooling and Automation Ltd.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53474998
Notice how little was needed to create our own PPE production compared to what has been spent on PPE which has turned out to be substandard.