Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
So why did the WHO (who should know) say back in March (height of the pandemic for many countries) that there was no evidence they helped?
I believe the WHO also supported the 'punishment from God' theory about the Black Death in 1348. When the evidence changes so does the advice.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
For me it is simple - every time the government does anything - the chatterati/twitterati go massively ott in their response [Starmer incidentally being a notable exception]. All of the old exPMs have their 2 pennyworth - it becomes a kind of reverse 'outraged of Tonbridge Wells' as they all froget that the the Brexit referendum/GE suggest much of the public inhabit a different world. Also a failure to understand that probably a very high proportion of the 'Remain' vote were not strongly pro-European but feel a strong sense that the result must be respected.
So your reasons for continuing to back the Tories are entirely negative. I suspect that is probably the case for quite a large percentage of the Tory and Labour vote.
No but you must remember I voted Tory throughout the Blair era. I am not the target audience.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
It is worth pondering what will happen to the Faragist voters in the north at the next election.
Should they return to Labour, then several Tory gains look vulnerable.
Should they go to the Tories, then many more Labour seats could go blue.
Should they stay at home - then not much is likely to change.
As for Tory Remainers, they probably still haven’t been convinced by Starmer. If he is painted as an articulate and intelligent version of Corbyn, without the racism, dodgy friends, love of terrorists and mind bending arrogance, they might still cling to the Johnson party.
Starmer isn't the problem, as you can see from his approval figures. It's the Labour Party brand, which became toxic for many under Corbyn. It takes a while to repair that sort of damage.
Personally I think Labour has done well to reduce the Tory poll lead as much as it has in such a short space of time. Much of the credit goes to Starmer himself although Johnson's contribution mustn't be underestimated. The GE is some way off (probably) so Party leads don't matter much at the moment but if Johnson continues as he has begun the electorate may appreciate a boring but competent successor and vote for Starmer in great numbers.
That's my prediction anyway this Sunday morning, but we will have to wait for Brexit to start seriously affecting our lives before we see this come about....if indeed we ever do.
Yep, that is pretty much where I am. The electorate is generally small c conservative. If the Johnson/Cummings relentless havoc style of governing does not produce results it could well do for them quite quickly.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
You could if you had no understanding of the difference between correlation and causation.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
So have masks.
I can understand you wanting to make an argument over philosophy, to say I don't care if this saves lives . . . But to pretend this is about what works is a nonsense. Masks work.
Are you that arrogant and medically trained to dismiss the WHO as giving out nonsense in March?
They were not ‘giving out nonsense.’ They said there was no evidence that masks helped. Which was correct.
Now there is evidence, they’ve changed their guidance.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
There was no shortage of people arguing they wouldn’t back in the day.
To take an extreme example, Jochen Rindt died because he refused to wear his seatbelt properly. He was afraid if his car caught fire, he wouldn’t be able to remove his belt in time to jump out. As a result, he only attached half of it and it garrotted him when he crashed.
You can't really argue from well chosen examples, Doc, because there are plenty of cases where the seat belt actually cost lives. The statistical evidence indicates clearly however that their introduction was one of a number of measures that have dramatically decreased the number of car accident fatalities in the UK since they peaked in 1966.
That was, incidentally, the year I passed my test. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?
The testing regime seems completely broken as well, Times saying that tests are being sent to Italy and Germany to be processed but loads are not being sent in proper conditions so the results aren't reliable.
They seem to have built a house of cards testing system which is about to completely collapse. We've had >£15bn spent and 4 months to prepare for this second wave. It's a complete disaster.
All they seem to have done in concentrate on increasing capacity whilst giving little thought to how they would manage demand. And how they could best use the capacity they had to deliver useful results to inform the response. Comparisons with the levels of testing in other countries to shows how much more we are doing and how great we are is meaningless if they have capacity appropriate to the level of testing they deem appropriate and we don’t.
And this comes from the politicians initially, and the failure to take advice from those who are capable of understanding the future pitfalls. Or appointment of bad advisors.
If we are sending tests to Italy and Germany, then it would suggest that they haven't managed capacity very well either.
As I have said all along, testing numbers are not everything. An effective system needs capacity, but it also needs to test the right people at the right time, and to act an the results.
I see this as a failure of outsourcing. It would be better to be integrated into the rest of Primary care, with every General Practice having a practice nurse doing the testing, even if they are processed in a central laboratory.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
So have masks.
I can understand you wanting to make an argument over philosophy, to say I don't care if this saves lives . . . But to pretend this is about what works is a nonsense. Masks work.
Are you that arrogant and medically trained to dismiss the WHO as giving out nonsense in March?
Aristotle thought the sun went round the earth. Are you a greater scientist than Aristotle?
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
You could if you had no understanding of the difference between correlation and causation.
Which is my point with drawing a conclusion that just because hospitalisations are not at the same rate (yet?) as increased cases suggest they should be it is to do with whipping on (and then whipping off as soon as you get out) masks in a indoor space.
At the moment, I have seen no evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
If a spaceship lands on Regent’s Park, and a Zarboom from Alpha Centauri gives an interview to Andrew Neil and Sir Roger Penrose where it discusses the practicalities of interstellar flight, I will say there is evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
Both statements will be correct. Because the circumstances will have changed.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
So have masks.
I can understand you wanting to make an argument over philosophy, to say I don't care if this saves lives . . . But to pretend this is about what works is a nonsense. Masks work.
Are you that arrogant and medically trained to dismiss the WHO as giving out nonsense in March?
Aristotle thought the sun went round the earth. Are you a greater scientist than Aristotle?
I think a number of people on here thinks the sun actually shines out their arse
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
It is worth pondering what will happen to the Faragist voters in the north at the next election.
Should they return to Labour, then several Tory gains look vulnerable.
Should they go to the Tories, then many more Labour seats could go blue.
Should they stay at home - then not much is likely to change.
As for Tory Remainers, they probably still haven’t been convinced by Starmer. If he is painted as an articulate and intelligent version of Corbyn, without the racism, dodgy friends, love of terrorists and mind bending arrogance, they might still cling to the Johnson party.
Starmer isn't the problem, as you can see from his approval figures. It's the Labour Party brand, which became toxic for many under Corbyn. It takes a while to repair that sort of damage.
Personally I think Labour has done well to reduce the Tory poll lead as much as it has in such a short space of time. Much of the credit goes to Starmer himself although Johnson's contribution mustn't be underestimated. The GE is some way off (probably) so Party leads don't matter much at the moment but if Johnson continues as he has begun the electorate may appreciate a boring but competent successor and vote for Starmer in great numbers.
That's my prediction anyway this Sunday morning, but we will have to wait for Brexit to start seriously affecting our lives before we see this come about....if indeed we ever do.
Yep, that is pretty much where I am. The electorate is generally small c conservative. If the Johnson/Cummings relentless havoc style of governing does not produce results it could well do for them quite quickly.
February is my guess, especially if Kent becomes a car park and you can't buy a decent Camembert anywhere.
Either you accept the WHO guidance as being underpinned by the best available science or you don’t. But the idea that you should hold guidance of 6 months ago as sacred, but reject the guidance of today is bizarre, except if it conveniently aligns with your wider beliefs.
A further point is that at the start of the pandemic a large amount of the focus was on the extent to which masks protected yourself from direct infection. So a lot of the guidance/science reflected that, and I don’t believe has changed that much. Only very high quality/medical grade masks are much good.
The big development has been the realisation of the extent to which general mask wearing protects whole populations from each other.
There was an interesting article I read a month or so ago comparing masks and types you should wear. One point that was made was that expensive “cycling” masks were very bad. Because the were designed specifically to prevent bad stuff getting in and little to prevent bad stuff getting out. So weren’t any good as a “population protection” measure. And also as regards personal protection suffered from all the downsides of face touching/fiddling/not wearing properly etc etc
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
There was no shortage of people arguing they wouldn’t back in the day.
To take an extreme example, Jochen Rindt died because he refused to wear his seatbelt properly. He was afraid if his car caught fire, he wouldn’t be able to remove his belt in time to jump out. As a result, he only attached half of it and it garrotted him when he crashed.
You can't really argue from well chosen examples, Doc, because there are plenty of cases where the seat belt actually cost lives. The statistical evidence indicates clearly however that their introduction was one of a number of measures that have dramatically decreased the number of car accident fatalities in the UK since they peaked in 1966.
That was, incidentally, the year I passed my test. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?
The point is that when they were brought in, there were those who argued it would cost more lives than it saved.
The evidence accumulated clearly states they were wrong, but they were not necessarily mad or lying. It was just their evidence was incomplete.
"Not the same without the audience participation, but another great last night at the proms, why did they spoil it with, you'll never walk alone, the orchestras enthusiasm ,made the night."
A friend just posted tis on my Facebook page. Lifelong Labour supporter - and diehard blue.... Evertonian. Folk are generally both more and less complicated than we give them credit for.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
So have masks.
I can understand you wanting to make an argument over philosophy, to say I don't care if this saves lives . . . But to pretend this is about what works is a nonsense. Masks work.
Are you that arrogant and medically trained to dismiss the WHO as giving out nonsense in March?
When the facts change I change my mind. What do you do, sir?
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
At the moment, I have seen no evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
If a spaceship lands on Regent’s Park, and a Zarboom from Alpha Centauri gives an interview to Andrew Neil and Sir Roger Penrose where it discusses the practicalities of interstellar flight, I will say there is evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
Both statements will be correct. Because the circumstances will have changed.
But we have pandemics/epidemics in nearly every decade so not sure why a typical pandemic that covid-19 is is suddenly enlightening (over 4 months) to change decades old research by the worlds medical authority. My suspicion is that decisions are now taken politically in a media centric world now and the need to be seen to be able to control and have a solution for everything bad by government is driving this . This is not just a UK think of course but in most countries of the world .
In mask news, my daughter's primary school has acted to have staff wear masks in al, the places they are allowed. Parents too also being told to wear masks if coming into school property and I'm almost certain they will be told to mask up whilst hovering outside the gate awaiting their children.
Why? Because it's patently obvious the school is not and cannot be Covid secure. No pox cases, but lots of kids transmitting to each other coughs and sneezles. It's the same at the primary school my wife is a TA at - they haven't done masks yet but the rate of transmission of everything but the Rona is alarming the management.
In that school the "Covid safe" regulations pose a fresh challenge - space. Several classrooms barely fit desks for the children in the mandated rows. Moving around the classroom is difficult because they're all squashed together. Which aside from not being remotely Covid safe is probably not fire safe...
In mask news, my daughter's primary school has acted to have staff wear masks in al, the places they are allowed. Parents too also being told to wear masks if coming into school property and I'm almost certain they will be told to mask up whilst hovering outside the gate awaiting their children.
Why? Because it's patently obvious the school is not and cannot be Covid secure. No pox cases, but lots of kids transmitting to each other coughs and sneezles. It's the same at the primary school my wife is a TA at - they haven't done masks yet but the rate of transmission of everything but the Rona is alarming the management.
In that school the "Covid safe" regulations pose a fresh challenge - space. Several classrooms barely fit desks for the children in the mandated rows. Moving around the classroom is difficult because they're all squashed together. Which aside from not being remotely Covid safe is probably not fire safe...
We’re not allowed to move around within the rooms. We have to keep at distance from the children.
I don’t know what dumb twat thought that would ever work, but them’s the rules.
There are at least 20 semi random (if connected) elements to this election and to get a 269 tie there are only a couple that produce this result. Add in Biden's current lead in the national polls and the fairly strong likelihood, right now, that he is going to win fairly comfortably and...nah.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
I suspect anothe positive side effect of the mask wearing during the winter will be a big reduction in cases of colds and flu - something which could ave several health systems from crashing.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
At the moment, I have seen no evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
If a spaceship lands on Regent’s Park, and a Zarboom from Alpha Centauri gives an interview to Andrew Neil and Sir Roger Penrose where it discusses the practicalities of interstellar flight, I will say there is evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
Both statements will be correct. Because the circumstances will have changed.
But we have pandemics/epidemics in nearly every decade so not sure why a typical pandemic that covid-19 is is suddenly enlightening (over 4 months) to change decades old research by the worlds medical authority. My suspicion is that decisions are now taken politically in a media centric world now and the need to be seen to be able to control and have a solution for everything bad by government is driving this . This is not just a UK think of course but in most countries of the world .
The whole point is this is not a typical pandemic. Typical pandemics do not have this level of virulence or medical damage, thankfully. Nor has this followed the rules of normal epidemiology - as one scientist said to me, it hasn’t read the rules on how a good virus behaves. Load seems to be as important as initial infection, for instance.
So their advice at the time was correct, on the assumption this would be a typical flu-style pandemic. Now it’s obvious it isn’t, and the accumulated evidence shows masks make an appreciable difference, the guidance is updated.
What you are saying is that we should go with initial guidance not based on the evidence, rather than advice modified in light of new evidence. I must confess I find it hard to understand why you think that.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
"Extreme measures"?
I think its extreme not being allowed inside public places (and thus destroying businesses in the action) without an unecessary face cloth. There is no evidence this works and the WHO said so back in March until politicians decided they thought it would be a symbol of how they could control (they plainly cannot) a pandemic which (as all pandemics do) is to run its course naturally
There is a great deal of evidence accumulated this year to demonstrate that masks have efficacy in preventing transmission of the virus. The WHO has since (somewhat belatedly) altered its guidance.
By insisting on going into enclosed public spaces without a mask, you would be imposing your own choices on many other people. Which doesn’t seem particularly libertarian to me.
Either you accept the WHO guidance as being underpinned by the best available science or you don’t. But the idea that you should hold guidance of 6 months ago as sacred, but reject the guidance of today is bizarre, except if it conveniently aligns with your wider beliefs.
A further point is that at the start of the pandemic a large amount of the focus was on the extent to which masks protected yourself from direct infection. So a lot of the guidance/science reflected that, and I don’t believe has changed that much. Only very high quality/medical grade masks are much good.
The big development has been the realisation of the extent to which general mask wearing protects whole populations from each other.
There was an interesting article I read a month or so ago comparing masks and types you should wear. One point that was made was that expensive “cycling” masks were very bad. Because the were designed specifically to prevent bad stuff getting in and little to prevent bad stuff getting out. So weren’t any good as a “population protection” measure. And also as regards personal protection suffered from all the downsides of face touching/fiddling/not wearing properly etc etc
Valved masks protect the user, but not others to the same degree, but possibly in part even then.
I think the evidence now is that face touching behaviour is reduced in mask wearers. In addition it is clear that this is mostly an airborne contagion, and much less due to contaminated surfaces. Face touching problems matters less than mask wearing.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
So if car crashes kill 100,000 people a year, and the introduction of compulsory seat belts reduces that figure to 10 people a year, that proves that the risk of dying in a car crash was always too trivial to justify the extreme measure of compulsory seat belts.
But car seat belts have been proven to save lives .
There was no shortage of people arguing they wouldn’t back in the day.
To take an extreme example, Jochen Rindt died because he refused to wear his seatbelt properly. He was afraid if his car caught fire, he wouldn’t be able to remove his belt in time to jump out. As a result, he only attached half of it and it garrotted him when he crashed.
You can't really argue from well chosen examples, Doc, because there are plenty of cases where the seat belt actually cost lives. The statistical evidence indicates clearly however that their introduction was one of a number of measures that have dramatically decreased the number of car accident fatalities in the UK since they peaked in 1966.
That was, incidentally, the year I passed my test. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?
The point is that when they were brought in, there were those who argued it would cost more lives than it saved.
The evidence accumulated clearly states they were wrong, but they were not necessarily mad or lying. It was just their evidence was incomplete.
Tell me about it. My old man was one of them. He regarded it as nothing more than another form of 'State Interference', which he hated. Went to his grave thinking that, but not I am glad to say as a result of never wearing a seat belt.
I suspect anothe positive side effect of the mask wearing during the winter will be a big reduction in cases of colds and flu - something which could ave several health systems from crashing.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
Mask wearing is reducing viral load, which reduces the severity of the illness. The data and evidence is there.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
"Not the same without the audience participation, but another great last night at the proms, why did they spoil it with, you'll never walk alone, the orchestras enthusiasm ,made the night."
A friend just posted tis on my Facebook page. Lifelong Labour supporter - and diehard blue.... Evertonian. Folk are generally both more and less complicated than we give them credit for.
We watched it. It was fine. Not only did they not cut the words but they were even presented in subtitles. It was all very tasteful though it lacked the usual ebullience of audience participation.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
Referendum on capital punishment and gay marriage.
First succeeds, second fails.
So Johnson and Cummings can marry before they are hanged.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
The single most compelling argument for parliamentary governance, rather than government by plebiscite.
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
I suspect anothe positive side effect of the mask wearing during the winter will be a big reduction in cases of colds and flu - something which could ave several health systems from crashing.
As will the hand sanitiser push.
Since I'm in a good mood this lovely Sunday Morning I'll suggest that in the long run the pandemic may save lives by improving our standards of hygiene generally. My own personal habits have improved considerably. (Please don't ask too many questions about this.)
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
This is the variolation hypothesis which Foxy drew our attention to a couple of days ago and which I reposted and discussed yesterday. I, too, am attracted to it as an answer to the puzzle of why infections seems to be rising yet this is not accompanied (even after a few days) with incresed covid hospitalisations.
To take an extreme example, Jochen Rindt died because he refused to wear his seatbelt properly. He was afraid if his car caught fire, he wouldn’t be able to remove his belt in time to jump out. As a result, he only attached half of it and it garrotted him when he crashed.
When I rolled my Mk.2 GTi (the full 720°) the chassis twisted and the seatbelt would not release. My mate (who was now missing 25-50% of his teeth, LOL) had to cut me out with a Stanley knife while bleeding all over me. I'd still rather be wearing one. Had airbag burns from the total destruction of a rented Passat in France as well.
In mask news, my daughter's primary school has acted to have staff wear masks in al, the places they are allowed. Parents too also being told to wear masks if coming into school property and I'm almost certain they will be told to mask up whilst hovering outside the gate awaiting their children.
Why? Because it's patently obvious the school is not and cannot be Covid secure. No pox cases, but lots of kids transmitting to each other coughs and sneezles. It's the same at the primary school my wife is a TA at - they haven't done masks yet but the rate of transmission of everything but the Rona is alarming the management.
In that school the "Covid safe" regulations pose a fresh challenge - space. Several classrooms barely fit desks for the children in the mandated rows. Moving around the classroom is difficult because they're all squashed together. Which aside from not being remotely Covid safe is probably not fire safe...
It was always obvious from the start, as any GP could have told you in a heartbeat, that any attempt to control COVID in schools through managed isolations based on “symptoms” was a fools errand. The spectrum of “symptoms” has always been far too wide*. Young children go to school. They pick up cough and sneezes (and worse). They spread them everywhere. And potentially very dangerous if the result was that potentially serious conditions were overlooked out of assumption that they were simple COVID.
*This is probably also an issue with the self selection for Coronavirus testing. Everyone thinks their symptomatic when very few are. Hence huge inefficiency in actually locating positive tests as part of the testing process.
In mask news, my daughter's primary school has acted to have staff wear masks in al, the places they are allowed. Parents too also being told to wear masks if coming into school property and I'm almost certain they will be told to mask up whilst hovering outside the gate awaiting their children.
Why? Because it's patently obvious the school is not and cannot be Covid secure. No pox cases, but lots of kids transmitting to each other coughs and sneezles. It's the same at the primary school my wife is a TA at - they haven't done masks yet but the rate of transmission of everything but the Rona is alarming the management.
In that school the "Covid safe" regulations pose a fresh challenge - space. Several classrooms barely fit desks for the children in the mandated rows. Moving around the classroom is difficult because they're all squashed together. Which aside from not being remotely Covid safe is probably not fire safe...
Sounds similar to the school in which my wife teaches. As community infections continue to rise, it is a bit worrying.
Looking at those US election odds again its very odd for tissues in a pretty much toss up overall odds of who will win to have narrowing odds in the band further away from the draw (or tie) ie 7/2 in 300-349 but 6/1 in 270 -299. Admittedly it is a slightly bigger range but the odds reduction is bigger . I suggest then that if there is some value in a big overoudn like this it is certianly NOT in the 7/2 bets
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
The single most compelling argument for parliamentary governance, rather than government by plebiscite.
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
My goodness there are a lot of people with a guilty conscience...
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
Glad to see that I had the right sort of feel of it back then, my years studying chemistry weren't completely useless.
Yes your comment is remarkably prescient and really sums it up very well. https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2771259/#Comment_2771259 Viral replication lead time. It takes longer for a virus to replicate than bacteria in general. If you start with less then the growth to a critical level will take a few extra days allowing the body time to fend it off. If you start with more then it can grow more quickly and overwhelm the immune system before it has found the correct antibody.
When your overriding aim is to give your mates taxpayers' money, you end up with the entirely dysfunctional system we now have. And, of course, Cummings and Johnson believe even more of our cash should be thrown at their chums.
I suspect anothe positive side effect of the mask wearing during the winter will be a big reduction in cases of colds and flu - something which could ave several health systems from crashing.
As will the hand sanitiser push.
Since I'm in a good mood this lovely Sunday Morning I'll suggest that in the long run the pandemic may save lives by improving our standards of hygiene generally. My own personal habits have improved considerably. (Please don't ask too many questions about this.)
I expect we will see alcohol hand sanitiser stations in many public locations, not just hospitals, and be urged to use them. Care homes are an obvious place. So are classrooms, and lecture halls. Offices and railway stations. I know of one firm that has made an absolute fortune selling high-quality hand sanitiser very cheaply everywhere, simply by saying they will provide sanitiser, wipes, stations, maintenance, everything under contract. (And it’s bloody good too - got conditioner in it and leaves the hands lemon fresh. Way better than the rubbish you buy in the shops.)
Once that investment has been made, firms will be happy to pay the couple of pounds a week it will cost to keep them topped up, when they realise it cuts illness and increases productivity.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
Glad to see that I had the right sort of feel of it back then, my years studying chemistry weren't completely useless.
Although they would of course have been much better spent studying a proper subject like History
No, history is a hobby not a career choice (apologies), as my wife found out. She needed a master's in economics before she was able to get a look in for jobs outside of the education sector.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
It is worth pondering what will happen to the Faragist voters in the north at the next election.
Should they return to Labour, then several Tory gains look vulnerable.
Should they go to the Tories, then many more Labour seats could go blue.
Should they stay at home - then not much is likely to change.
As for Tory Remainers, they probably still haven’t been convinced by Starmer. If he is painted as an articulate and intelligent version of Corbyn, without the racism, dodgy friends, love of terrorists and mind bending arrogance, they might still cling to the Johnson party.
Starmer isn't the problem, as you can see from his approval figures. It's the Labour Party brand, which became toxic for many under Corbyn. It takes a while to repair that sort of damage.
Personally I think Labour has done well to reduce the Tory poll lead as much as it has in such a short space of time. Much of the credit goes to Starmer himself although Johnson's contribution mustn't be underestimated. The GE is some way off (probably) so Party leads don't matter much at the moment but if Johnson continues as he has begun the electorate may appreciate a boring but competent successor and vote for Starmer in great numbers.
That's my prediction anyway this Sunday morning, but we will have to wait for Brexit to start seriously affecting our lives before we see this come about....if indeed we ever do.
Yep, that is pretty much where I am. The electorate is generally small c conservative. If the Johnson/Cummings relentless havoc style of governing does not produce results it could well do for them quite quickly.
February is my guess, especially if Kent becomes a car park and you can't buy a decent Camembert anywhere.
No point in Camembert when one has no bread with which to consume it!
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
Glad to see that I had the right sort of feel of it back then, my years studying chemistry weren't completely useless.
Although they would of course have been much better spent studying a proper subject like History
No, history is a hobby not a career choice (apologies), as my wife found out. She needed a master's in economics before she was able to get a look in for jobs outside of the education sector.
I’ve got a master’s in political economy but I’m still in education.
Not sure how that relates to your point, I just thought I’d say it.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
Referendum on capital punishment and gay marriage.
First succeeds, second fails.
So Johnson and Cummings can marry before they are hanged.
(This is a joke, btw.)
When IS Johnson getting married again? Or is there substance to the rumour here yesterday, that Carrie's moved out and on?
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
Mask wearing is reducing viral load, which reduces the severity of the illness. The data and evidence is there.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
I think that those arguing against masks, e.g. Hitchens, would do better to focus their arguments on principles rather that science. Alleging that masks have no role in reducing viral transmission has become implausible. However, compelling people to do so and the loss of civil liberties that his entails is a better argument.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
True enough, but then the party of Macmillan and Heath had little in common with the party of Salisbury and Balfour. The agenda moves on.
A section of upper middle class former Conservatives turned very hostile to the party under Thatcher, resulting in the loss of historic Conservative seats, even as gaining working class voters turned other seats blue.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
Mask wearing is reducing viral load, which reduces the severity of the illness. The data and evidence is there.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
I think that those arguing against masks, e.g. Hitchens, would do better to focus their arguments on principles rather that science. Alleging that masks have no role in reducing viral transmission has become implausible. However, compelling people to do so and the loss of civil liberties that his entails is a better argument.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
Referendum on capital punishment and gay marriage.
First succeeds, second fails.
So Johnson and Cummings can marry before they are hanged.
(This is a joke, btw.)
When IS Johnson getting married again? Or is there substance to the rumour here yesterday, that Carrie's moved out and on?
I hope for her sake she has. He is not a good husband.
Admittedly, Nicholas II and Charles I were very good husbands, so the point doesn’t follow.
Am I the only one who almost never understands who The Times cartoon is supposed to depict?
Homer Simpson and Yvette Cooper, obviously.
Pity the poor cartoonist. Some faces are very difficult to draw, I am told. Cameroon was famously so - very bland features. (I think the bloke is supposed to be Matt Hancock. No idea who the other is.)
By a process of elimination, I think it must be that Dido Harding.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
Mask wearing is reducing viral load, which reduces the severity of the illness. The data and evidence is there.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
I think that those arguing against masks, e.g. Hitchens, would do better to focus their arguments on principles rather that science. Alleging that masks have no role in reducing viral transmission has become implausible. However, compelling people to do so and the loss of civil liberties that his entails is a better argument.
Agreed 100%
A quick google suggest he has been arguing against loss of civil liberties and state control
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
True enough, but then the party of Macmillan and Heath had little in common with the party of Salisbury and Balfour. The agenda moves on.
A section of upper middle class former Conservatives turned very hostile to the party under Thatcher, resulting in the loss of historic Conservative seats, even as gaining working class voters turned other seats blue.
Especially in Scotland of course. The passage in Alistair Darling’s memoirs describing his parents’ fury at some of Thatcher’s policies and their decision to switch their votes was interesting.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
The single most compelling argument for parliamentary governance, rather than government by plebiscite.
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
My goodness there are a lot of people with a guilty conscience...
I don't expect to be facing a judge with a black cap, unless criticism of Johnson is deemed treasonous.
I do not want to live anywhere that allows the state to take on the role of God. It is particularly troublesome when one looks at the fatigue of miscarriages of justice we have seen since 1964.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
And wind farms are definitely the biggests culprits when it comes to global warming.
I think we are on the same page with not equating correlation with cause which started my challenge below against the assumption that the rate of low hospitalisations against new cases was to do with mask wearing
Mask wearing is reducing viral load, which reduces the severity of the illness. The data and evidence is there.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
I think that those arguing against masks, e.g. Hitchens, would do better to focus their arguments on principles rather that science. Alleging that masks have no role in reducing viral transmission has become implausible. However, compelling people to do so and the loss of civil liberties that his entails is a better argument.
It's about the same level as arguing against seatbelts, which is to say pretty pointless. I honestly don't understand the controversy. Wear a mask, reduce the chances of spreading and getting the disease, if you do get it then you are more likely to get it asymptomatically or a mild level of symptoms significantly reducing risk of death or severe ongoing problems.
It's an absolute no-brainer and people arguing against them are, IMO, illiterate.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
I think that these are interesting hypotheses/conjectures, but that at the moment there is not enough evidence either way to conclude anything. There are many factors involved in different countries, with different histories of the epidemic.
I think it is too soon to draw conclusions about many aspects of this pandemic, such as immunity, the effect of wearing masks, etc., although the temptation to do so is strong.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
Well some did of course but what was more questionable in WW2 was the execution of german spies (not traitors) but just spies. The last execution in the Tower of London was of a german spy who had the misfortune to be picked up almost on entering the country (I think by parachute) . Given he was probably compelled to do this by the german authorities it seems harsh to have exectuted him and other such cases. Lets not forget the quasi executions of huge amount of civilians in WW2 by British bombers who deliberately targeted civilians in mass bombings towards the end of the war , the most terribel example being Dresden where a deliberate policy of creating a firestorm to kill as many civilians as possible was deemed legitimate.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
Glad to see that I had the right sort of feel of it back then, my years studying chemistry weren't completely useless.
Although they would of course have been much better spent studying a proper subject like History
No, history is a hobby not a career choice (apologies), as my wife found out. She needed a master's in economics before she was able to get a look in for jobs outside of the education sector.
Hmm. Thought. Grandson 2 is doing History at A level...... currently expected get either a very good B or just about an A and I was wondering about suggesting he thought about doing that at Uni. He's planning something practical at the moment.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
Except possibly Tony Blair.
The last words of John Amery were brilliant:
"Ah, Mr. Pierrepoint, I've long wanted to meet you, but not, I'm sure you'll understand, under present circumstances."
If you were a condemned war criminal, you'd want to be hanged by the British. The Americans were pretty sloppy executioners, and most of Eastern Europe used the short drop.
Could explain why we're seeing a huge rise in cases but not a very big rise in hospitalisations. If it's true then the government should have tougher mask rules and more scenarios where they should be worn.
Or that the disease is not that serious enough to warrant extreme measures like mask wearing in the first place
Or you could actually read the article and see why wearing one is a good thing and may lead to a faster end of the crisis and herd immunity without as many fatalities.
The article is paywalled in the Telegraph, but the case is made in this open access piece in the NEJM, Americas leading medical journal.
You could just as easily argue that cases have increased during the enforced mask wearing period (which they have) and reach a conclusion they are at best ineffective and at worst contributing to it
The obvious answer is that we’re detecting a far higher proportion of cases compared with April. It’s funny to read the mask fascists moving from “wear a mask to protect others” to “wear a mask to catch COVID a little bit”. As you say, the original line means that you shouldn’t be catching it in an environment where everyone is wearing a mask.
It is odd that it has taken ~8 months for the variolation hypothesis to get serious consideration as it seemed obvious that the dosage of infection is important for the severity of the disease already in the case of Dr Li Wenliang the canary in the minepit of Wuhan.
Indeed we were discussing the importance of viral load at infection from about March/April. Much of the evidence that masks work came around the same time (and related to) the realisation about how important viral load is.
Glad to see that I had the right sort of feel of it back then, my years studying chemistry weren't completely useless.
Although they would of course have been much better spent studying a proper subject like History
No, history is a hobby not a career choice (apologies), as my wife found out. She needed a master's in economics before she was able to get a look in for jobs outside of the education sector.
Hmm. Thought. Grandson 2 is doing History at A level...... currently expected get either a very good B or just about an A and I was wondering about suggesting he thought about doing that at Uni. He's planning something practical at the moment.
Depends on whether he’s willing to do further study.
Max is correct incidentally that studying a history degree, on its own, isn’t usually enough for a top job. What it is is an excellent foundation for one year professional qualifications in a number of fields. Law. Business. Record management. Administration.
But you do need to be willing to do at least a further year to make that work.
However, I would advise most people doing a degree to be ready to do specific postgrad study now anyway.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
The single most compelling argument for parliamentary governance, rather than government by plebiscite.
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
My goodness there are a lot of people with a guilty conscience...
I don't expect to be facing a judge with a black cap, unless criticism of Johnson is deemed treasonous.
I do not want to live anywhere that allows the state to take on the role of God. It is particularly troublesome when one looks at the fatigue of miscarriages of justice we have seen since 1964.
Why would autocorrect change catalogue to fatigue?
It is indicative of agendas that a lot of the reporting on this is as if the BBC adopted a "dramatic" last minute U-turn and nobody was expecting the words to be inserted
When in fact the announced the change weeks ago. Basically a lot of the popular press and politicians jumped onto it when it was originally announced, got very worked up about it, and then didn't pay any attention after that.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
True enough, but then the party of Macmillan and Heath had little in common with the party of Salisbury and Balfour. The agenda moves on.
A section of upper middle class former Conservatives turned very hostile to the party under Thatcher, resulting in the loss of historic Conservative seats, even as gaining working class voters turned other seats blue.
Indeed, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries the Conservative Party of Disraeli, Joseph Chamberlain, Salisbury and Balfour won lots of working class votes on an agenda of Empire, tariffs and under Disraeli some social reform while the Liberal Party of Gladstone, Rosebery, Campbell Bannerman and Asquith won lots of middle class votes on an agenda of free trade.
The Tories had only really became the party of the middle class by the mid 20th century in response to the emergence of the Labour Party as the party of the working class and the decline of the Liberal Party, Brexit is probably the biggest political realignment potentially since then
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
I think it is interesting that people like Richard Nabavi, David Herdson and TSE - who were very loyal, ideologically-driven Tories that accepted the Brexit result and were convinced that it had to be honoured - have walked away from the party under Johnson, but that they do not seem to represent a movement, as such. It's notable that so many very talented individual Tories have deserted the party, but that this has not had much of an impact on its overall vote. That said, these are early days in this Parliament and the consequences of the undeliverable Brexit that Johnson and co have promised are yet to be felt, so maybe the old-style PB Tories are just the vanguard who have spent more time thinking about it than others have up to now.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I can definitely see him doing it. That's the point at which I leave the country!
The single most compelling argument for parliamentary governance, rather than government by plebiscite.
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
My goodness there are a lot of people with a guilty conscience...
I don't expect to be facing a judge with a black cap, unless criticism of Johnson is deemed treasonous.
I do not want to live anywhere that allows the state to take on the role of God. It is particularly troublesome when one looks at the fatigue of miscarriages of justice we have seen since 1964.
Yes, on balance the death penalty is more trouble than it's worth. I don't have the same absolutist reaction against it though, for two reasons. First, some people really, really, really deserve the death penalty. Second, miscarriages of justice are unavoidable in any justice system. We permit the State to lock people away for life, which - to put an arbitrary figure on it - deprives them of 80% of the pleasure of living. Some of those people will of course be innocent, and yet we accept their suffering as the price of administering justice and they don't generate anywhere near the sympathy that those on death row do. It's a question of the degree of injustice we're prepared to tolerate, rather than of the death penalty being some superlative evil totally separate from an otherwise pristine system.
I have been thinking about the polling a little more and what intrigues me most is not continuing Red Wall support for the Tories, which I would expect given that once you have convinced yourself to make the leap you are not going to change your mind without very good reason, but the ongoing backing the party gets from a portion of Remainers. I am genuinely interested in knowing what is keeping them onside right now. Surely, it is more than tribalism.
Back in the day voting Conservative used to be seen as a mark of personal success by certain types of people. It was a theme running through the Margot Leadbeater character in The Good Life, she was posh so she voted Conservative and voting Conservative confirmed she was posh. Not voting Conservative might be seen in these circles as an admission of failure.
The reality these days however is that the Conservative Party under McMillan or Heath shares very little with Johnson's party except for the name.
Let's hope so.
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
I think it would take a serious war, for the restoration of capital punishment to become a reality. In a WWII situation, no one would object to the execution of traitors or war criminals.
Well some did of course but what was more questionable in WW2 was the execution of german spies (not traitors) but just spies. The last execution in the Tower of London was of a german spy who had the misfortune to be picked up almost on entering the country (I think by parachute) . Given he was probably compelled to do this by the german authorities it seems harsh to have exectuted him and other such cases. Lets not forget the quasi executions of huge amount of civilians in WW2 by British bombers who deliberately targeted civilians in mass bombings towards the end of the war , the most terribel example being Dresden where a deliberate policy of creating a firestorm to kill as many civilians as possible was deemed legitimate.
Spies know that's the risk they run in wartime (and often outside of wartime).
After four or five years of war, the revelation of the Holocaust and Generalplan Ost, few people would have had much sympathy for the victims of bombing.
Comments
Mid July
https://twitter.com/AlistairHaimes/status/1281544889650610176
Mid September
https://twitter.com/AlistairHaimes/status/1303792948417638401
The rise to the massive peak in the second tweet is when he was declaring it was declining sharply in the first.
Now there is evidence, they’ve changed their guidance.
What were they supposed to do? Lie to save face?
I was disturbed by your assertion last evening that Johnson will at some point in the future call a referendum to restore capital punishment, in order to bolster his flagging popularity. I may be naive, but I am hoping this is a step too far even for Johnson.
That was, incidentally, the year I passed my test. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?
As I have said all along, testing numbers are not everything. An effective system needs capacity, but it also needs to test the right people at the right time, and to act an the results.
I see this as a failure of outsourcing. It would be better to be integrated into the rest of Primary care, with every General Practice having a practice nurse doing the testing, even if they are processed in a central laboratory.
At the moment, I have seen no evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
If a spaceship lands on Regent’s Park, and a Zarboom from Alpha Centauri gives an interview to Andrew Neil and Sir Roger Penrose where it discusses the practicalities of interstellar flight, I will say there is evidence of intelligent life on other planets.
Both statements will be correct. Because the circumstances will have changed.
A further point is that at the start of the pandemic a large amount of the focus was on the extent to which masks protected yourself from direct infection. So a lot of the guidance/science reflected that, and I don’t believe has changed that much. Only very high quality/medical grade masks are much good.
The big development has been the realisation of the extent to which general mask wearing protects whole populations from each other.
There was an interesting article I read a month or so ago comparing masks and types you should wear. One point that was made was that expensive “cycling” masks were very bad. Because the were designed specifically to prevent bad stuff getting in and little to prevent bad stuff getting out. So weren’t any good as a “population protection” measure. And also as regards personal protection suffered from all the downsides of face touching/fiddling/not wearing properly etc etc
The evidence accumulated clearly states they were wrong, but they were not necessarily mad or lying. It was just their evidence was incomplete.
A friend just posted tis on my Facebook page. Lifelong Labour supporter - and diehard blue.... Evertonian.
Folk are generally both more and less complicated than we give them credit for.
Why? Because it's patently obvious the school is not and cannot be Covid secure. No pox cases, but lots of kids transmitting to each other coughs and sneezles. It's the same at the primary school my wife is a TA at - they haven't done masks yet but the rate of transmission of everything but the Rona is alarming the management.
In that school the "Covid safe" regulations pose a fresh challenge - space. Several classrooms barely fit desks for the children in the mandated rows. Moving around the classroom is difficult because they're all squashed together. Which aside from not being remotely Covid safe is probably not fire safe...
I don’t know what dumb twat thought that would ever work, but them’s the rules.
We were discussing the significance of viral load right before lockdown was introduced.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2771281#Comment_2771281
So their advice at the time was correct, on the assumption this would be a typical flu-style pandemic. Now it’s obvious it isn’t, and the accumulated evidence shows masks make an appreciable difference, the guidance is updated.
What you are saying is that we should go with initial guidance not based on the evidence, rather than advice modified in light of new evidence. I must confess I find it hard to understand why you think that.
The WHO has since (somewhat belatedly) altered its guidance.
By insisting on going into enclosed public spaces without a mask, you would be imposing your own choices on many other people. Which doesn’t seem particularly libertarian to me.
I think the evidence now is that face touching behaviour is reduced in mask wearers. In addition it is clear that this is mostly an airborne contagion, and much less due to contaminated surfaces. Face touching problems matters less than mask wearing.
I expect he wouldn't have worn a mask either.
If you wish to oppose mask wearing because of other reasons then make that case - but if you're trying to do so based on evidence then the facts are not on your side.
First succeeds, second fails.
So Johnson and Cummings can marry before they are hanged.
(This is a joke, btw.)
I'll be in the queue too, I will make my arrangements the moment the referendum is called. No point in waiting for the result.
*This is probably also an issue with the self selection for Coronavirus testing. Everyone thinks their symptomatic when very few are. Hence huge inefficiency in actually locating positive tests as part of the testing process.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2771259/#Comment_2771259
Viral replication lead time. It takes longer for a virus to replicate than bacteria in general. If you start with less then the growth to a critical level will take a few extra days allowing the body time to fend it off. If you start with more then it can grow more quickly and overwhelm the immune system before it has found the correct antibody.
Once that investment has been made, firms will be happy to pay the couple of pounds a week it will cost to keep them topped up, when they realise it cuts illness and increases productivity.
(I think the bloke is supposed to be Matt Hancock. No idea who the other is.)
Not sure how that relates to your point, I just thought I’d say it.
A section of upper middle class former Conservatives turned very hostile to the party under Thatcher, resulting in the loss of historic Conservative seats, even as gaining working class voters turned other seats blue.
Admittedly, Nicholas II and Charles I were very good husbands, so the point doesn’t follow.
I do not want to live anywhere that allows the state to take on the role of God. It is particularly troublesome when one looks at the fatigue of miscarriages of justice we have seen since 1964.
https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1305054044055105536/photo/1
It's an absolute no-brainer and people arguing against them are, IMO, illiterate.
I think it is too soon to draw conclusions about many aspects of this pandemic, such as immunity, the effect of wearing masks, etc., although the temptation to do so is strong.
Lets not forget the quasi executions of huge amount of civilians in WW2 by British bombers who deliberately targeted civilians in mass bombings towards the end of the war , the most terribel example being Dresden where a deliberate policy of creating a firestorm to kill as many civilians as possible was deemed legitimate.
"Ah, Mr. Pierrepoint, I've long wanted to meet you, but not, I'm sure you'll understand, under present circumstances."
If you were a condemned war criminal, you'd want to be hanged by the British. The Americans were pretty sloppy executioners, and most of Eastern Europe used the short drop.
Max is correct incidentally that studying a history degree, on its own, isn’t usually enough for a top job. What it is is an excellent foundation for one year professional qualifications in a number of fields. Law. Business. Record management. Administration.
But you do need to be willing to do at least a further year to make that work.
However, I would advise most people doing a degree to be ready to do specific postgrad study now anyway.
It is indicative of agendas that a lot of the reporting on this is as if the BBC adopted a "dramatic" last minute U-turn and nobody was expecting the words to be inserted
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8726419/Britannia-rules-airwaves.html?ito=push-notification&ci=33430&si=16339098
When in fact the announced the change weeks ago. Basically a lot of the popular press and politicians jumped onto it when it was originally announced, got very worked up about it, and then didn't pay any attention after that.
The Tories had only really became the party of the middle class by the mid 20th century in response to the emergence of the Labour Party as the party of the working class and the decline of the Liberal Party, Brexit is probably the biggest political realignment potentially since then
After four or five years of war, the revelation of the Holocaust and Generalplan Ost, few people would have had much sympathy for the victims of bombing.