Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Exactly. PB being PB, over-represented by well off perhaps single (!) white blokes, the idea of locking everyone down comes easily and quickly. But it is impractical for economic, social, and psychological reasons.
We are going to have to come to terms with a modus vivendi that respects the virus but that works with it. We must not let it dominate us. Now....who said that....?
I think that we are creating a modus vivendi as you put it, and it is largely people being sensible. Increased distance and masks seem to be a way forward that lets most things happen rather than locking everything down.
Eventually there will be a vaccine or herd immunity will be achieved and things like pubs and cinemas can resume, but perhaps packing people in like peas in a pod will not be happening any more....
It would be a huge shame.
"...packing people in like peas in a pod..." represents some of the most important life experiences at any age.
This is not as I have repeated often on here a "let it rip" strategy but to protect those who most need protecting, to inform people (as if they're not already informed!) of the risks of spreading the disease, and to trust people beyond that.
As @contrarian has so often pointed out - once the administrative control genie is out of the bottle it is a huge challenge to put it back in. To say nothing of the economic damage. As to lockdowns, what is the strategy? Leicester is still in to no particular effect.
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Have you even been reading this board? We've had every solution from risk grading, hospitality closures and fiscal support, border closures, testing at airports, local lockdowns but limited national measures, moderate national measures but no local lockdown, closing pubs but not restaurants for a period, leaving hospitality open but tougher enforcement, and just about everything else. The only one I don't give credence to is "let it rip" because, frankly, I've seen what it can do to someone first hand and I really don't want it.
Every time one of those is mentioned the usual suspects pop up and mention the same "oh but 20 people out of 2 million had problems" we can't take the risk. Except we can and do every winter with the flu.
And on the roads. It`s the speed limit fallacy. The limit should be cut from 70 to 69 because if it saves one life it is the right thing to do, the limit should be cut from 69 to 68 because if it saves one life it is the right thing to do .... rinse and repeat right down to 0 mph. Reductio ad absurdum.
As far as I can see, nobody here is making such arguments. There are very real downsides to letting Covid rip, just as there are downsides to shutting down a portion of the economy. An honest discussion requires proper consideration of both sets of downsides.
Doesn't the fact that social security is on the agenda belie the idea we are just seeking a Canadian-style deal? It sounds more like there will be continued free movement under another name.
We're secretly seeking membership of the Euro and putting Jacob Rees-Mogg forward as the next spitzenkandidat.
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Indeed. There is far, far too much of that behaviour on PB.
When one asks what such posters advocate in place of endless total lockdown, one is almost invariably hit with a wall of silence.
That's not true. Just because you ignore the alternatives when they've been presented in the past doesn't mean they weren't given.
It's wearing to have people ignore you, or caricature you.
But when alternatives are offered to you, and the real practical problems with your suggestions are spelt out, they are ignored.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
Oh there you are. Just pondering your well-reasoned argument in favour of Boris staying on. It all made sense.
Except...the man always was patently unfit to be PM as is universally accepted. As was indeed TMay. Neither was just "bad", and each had a trait which would mean that they would at some time be found out and deposed one way or another. Or leave.
These things have a habit of not working in 24-hr rolling news time but in politics time which can be months and months as it was with May. When she became PM plenty called her a dead woman walking and so it proved. It's the same with Boris imo. He is not fit to be PM, as many fundamental character and political flaws and hence it is a matter of time before he goes.
Is the reason I have backed him to be out by Sep '21.
May was much, much worse than Johnson and had a much, much worse election result - and even she survived for years. Even IDS survived for years.
Very, very unlikely Johnson will be gone next year. I doubt Boris will go before 2023 at the earliest.
As @kinabalu noted, there is no mechanism by which he could go. Except, as noted above, I believe he is manifestly unfit to be PM to the point whereby it is simply unsustainable for him to continue.
And yes you are right as I also noted, May did survive, but she was, to quote Osborne (?) a dead woman walking and so it proved.
But of course yes we shall see.
I take the opposite betting view on this as you know. The 1.8 for Johnson to make it beyond July 2022 is imo a stonking bet. I've put a wedge on it.
BUT to just support your "MO" here. Forget the detailed reasoning, the possible mechanisms, precedent, all of that bunkum, if your strong intuition is that him being PM is not only absurd but SO absurd that it simply cannot go on for that long, you go with that
I do this a lot. Identify what I call Not Happening Events which the consensus thinks are quite likely and then lay them. Recent good examples, Corbyn becoming PM, a 2nd EU Referendum, a No Deal Brexit, a 2nd term for Donald Trump.
So, here, for you, Boris Johnson lasting the course as PM is a Not Happening Event.
I agree that 1.8 for Johnson to make it beyond July 2022 is a stonking bet. Shame you have to tie the cash up though. Still, low interest rates and all. I`m waiting until November when I`ll take this bet by using some of my Biden winnings! The arrogance of the gambler.
Well you could (insert dirty word) if it collapses to say 1.4 by next Spring. Hmm, and good point on the arrogance, Stocky. Let's you and me stop talking about spending these TrumpToast fortunes coming our way. The gods might be listening and they might be feeling bored and malevolent.
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
651 is a vanishingly low proportion of the total cohort. It is incredibly horrible for them that they had that ordeal, but it remains a general risk of almost zero.
I have no idea whether you have children or not. But, if you do, do you send them to school?
It's around 2% of the cohort at that time. A lot less likely than the rest of the population, but not zero. Scale it up by at least a factor of twenty if we put all kids through it.
I have three kids; one an adult, one now at University, one at school. And both the University and school ones are at University and school because the risk is very low at the moment.
Not, however, if we decide to let it rip through the kids.
If we overload the NHS (easily done if we let it go exponential), most of those who would pull through with ventilation support and some of those who need hospital treatment without ICU wouldn't pull through. And even if we managed to keep it within NHS capability - what do you think would happen to public opinion and willingness to go out and about if there were thousands of kids on ventilators?
Cineworld would be just the start. We were just getting back to some semblance of normal and people getting too blase messed it up. If we had kids pouring into hospitals and pictures and videos of that, no-one would give two wet farts about what proportion of them it was - they'd keep them home in droves.
I don't think we want that.
2% of the infected cohort? Or 2% of the tested positive cohort? (two very different things, the majority of infected children will never know they had it).
Of the total cohort there are approx 14 million under 20s in England. Of that total cohort, 615 (according to your data) have been hospitalised by covid-19.
About 2% of those hospitalised were under 19. If about one in twenty people had had it at that time, and the proportion was common across all age bands (to be honest, it wasn't - it was tilted towards the elderly thanks to the fuck-up with care homes), then we can scale up by a factor of twenty for the entire population.
Doesn't the fact that social security is on the agenda belie the idea we are just seeking a Canadian-style deal? It sounds more like there will be continued free movement under another name.
Hilarious utter bollocks take. Mafia game is racist and sexist and therefore tired and shit story. Why weren't any women given leading roles in a 1930s themed game about the mob.
Mafia III is great because it had a black main character...
No, it's not really. The government will push a national vaccination scheme for everyone over the age of 18. Not vaccinating 18-50 year olds will have a huge economic cost because it will take years for this cohort to acquire herd immunity and for life to resume as normal. A vaccine is a shortcut to a resumption of non distanced life, why buy 120m doses of we're only going to use half of them (two doses per person).
Quite rightly care workers and the vulnerable will get the vaccine first, as they should, then we will get back to normal.
Healthy young adults will eventually get the vaccine but we'd already be back to normal by the time they do.
No with the way the government has been fear mongering about the virus we won't return to normal until the vaccine programme has been completed. People are afraid of their own shadows at the moment.
I don't agree. Many young people are scared of infecting their loved ones - "don't kill your grandparents".
As far as I'm concerned once the vulnerable have been vaccinated I'm eager to get back to normal. I don't care about myself, I just don't want my grandparents to get it.
The problem is that even if only 25% of people are afraid of their own shadows then the economy will not return to anything like normal. A national vaccination programme and a study for vaccines in kids is the only way to resolve this. We can't run an economy without everyone participating in full.
I think you're being overly pessimistic. Once we've vaccinated the vulnerable deaths could drop to zero at which point it ceases to be a major news story. A lot of young people already want to get back to normal, give it another six months plus their grandparents have been vaccinated and you're not going to stop them getting back to normal whether you want to or not.
Deaths could drop to zero, like an honest die could come up 6 fifty times in a row. The people actually developing vaccines would bite your arm off for 50% efficacy.
The problem with the Biden EC market is that the hat above 300 it starts getting very lumpy.
On Universal Swing based on national average Biden is on 345 ECs. The next step up after that is Texas. So 383 ECs. Similarly going down it could be Florida and down 29 votes to 316. Knock of Georgia and NC as well and you are below 300 for a plausible map even with a massive Biden popular vote win.
A massive Biden popular win will include both Florida and North Carolina I think. If it doesn't, well it won't have been so massive.
OK, my stab at R based on today's case by report date figures = about 1.26 (or slightly higher).
Calculation note: based on change in 7 day rolling average compared to 7 days ago. The 16k additional cases have been spread evenly over the 8 days prior to report, so for today 8k been added to last week & 8k subtracted from this week. (I calculated at 1.27 yesterday, and that compared with a last available sample date value of 1.29 with the 16k cases added in. Note that, before the correction, even using sample date last week wouldn't have saved you from estimating R low).
Given hospitalisations are running at about 10-15% of peak, that R rate would now put us around one month away, nationally, of the peak daily hospitalisation levels seen in late March.
Twitter has censored Trump for saying we have to learn to live with Covid.
I presume they will claim it is because 100k is not an accurate statistic....but if they are going to censor every tweet with incorrect data, christ the volume of tweets will be down by a half at least.
I've never used an android tablet, but these days I prefer my android phone experience to an iCrap & I use andriod apps on my Fire Stick that work well, what is the big flaw in android tablets?
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Indeed. There is far, far too much of that behaviour on PB.
When one asks what such posters advocate in place of endless total lockdown, one is almost invariably hit with a wall of silence.
That's not true. Just because you ignore the alternatives when they've been presented in the past doesn't mean they weren't given.
It's wearing to have people ignore you, or caricature you.
But when alternatives are offered to you, and the real practical problems with your suggestions are spelt out, they are ignored.
So why go through the whole thing again?
I'm afraid it is true of the posters I am referring to. These posters did not and do not include you.
I've never used an android tablet, but these days I prefer my android phone experience to an iCrap & I use andriod apps on my Fire Stick that work well, what is the big flaw in android tablets?
Apps are poorly optimised for tablet experiences. Many iPad apps aren't available and d app developers seem content with just rendering their phone apps for a larger screen with lower pixel density.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
No I do get it. And the point is a good one. But you don't mean NEVER close. Say you buy something because you think it's underpriced and then having held it for a bit it goes iyo well overpriced. You sell it.
If you think it is overpriced then consider it a new bet (that just happens to be a close) not closing it.
Yes I think we are all on the same page.
Now then, "Boris", I missed his speech. Was it one of his best iyo? Did he rise to the occasion?
Same here. Also just gone in biggish on Biden to win Pennsylvania which I now see as pretty much nailed on.
Please remember I urged caution at the time.
You think Trump could spring a surprise? I think the biggest risk for Biden at this point is if he caught Covid. The Dems must be surely be shielding him from more or less everyone at the moment one hopes.
OK, my stab at R based on today's case by report date figures = about 1.26 (or slightly higher).
Calculation note: based on change in 7 day rolling average compared to 7 days ago. The 16k additional cases have been spread evenly over the 8 days prior to report, so for today 8k been added to last week & 8k subtracted from this week. (I calculated at 1.27 yesterday, and that compared with a last available sample date value of 1.29 with the 16k cases added in. Note that, before the correction, even using sample date last week wouldn't have saved you from estimating R low).
Given hospitalisations are running at about 10-15% of peak, that R rate would now put us around one month away, nationally, of the peak daily hospitalisation levels seen in late March.
Care to suggest your confidence interval?
We know that covid infections can't be exponential, although at low levels that is certainly the case. I've yet to see anyone who has bothered to fit the known constraints to their model in this.
So did the BBC eg Saville and Rolf Harris, so did many schools, so did some football clubs eg Crewe, Manchester City and Chelsea with former coaches, so did some political parties with the likes of Cyril Smith and Peter Morrison, the sexual abuse in the 1970s and 1980s went across the establishment, the Church was only one element.
Plus Welby has correctly issued an unqualified apology today
It's very far from enough though.
(To my mind Rolf Harris isn't in this category)
The BBC, the Church, and many other organisations should be having to answer questions as to why they shouldn't be closed down forthwith.
A forcible closedown of the CoE would be interesting. It'd remove a good portion of idiocy from the House of Lords for example. Welby is obviously a witch anyway, so we should warm up the fires. (Not serious of course, but who'd he be to argue?)
Utter rubbish, you would have to close down the BBC, the Churches Anglican and Catholic and Imams were not immune either in covering up abuse.
Our major political parties, most of our top private schools, many of our top football clubs and their youth team coaches even the Scouts all had abusers within them, the importance is the lessons learned
Too important to have to answer the allegations then?
My utter rubbish seems to be your denial.
No, the Church is answering them as is every other Institution covered by the remit of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Exactly. PB being PB, over-represented by well off perhaps single (!) white blokes, the idea of locking everyone down comes easily and quickly. But it is impractical for economic, social, and psychological reasons.
We are going to have to come to terms with a modus vivendi that respects the virus but that works with it. We must not let it dominate us. Now....who said that....?
I think that we are creating a modus vivendi as you put it, and it is largely people being sensible. Increased distance and masks seem to be a way forward that lets most things happen rather than locking everything down.
Eventually there will be a vaccine or herd immunity will be achieved and things like pubs and cinemas can resume, but perhaps packing people in like peas in a pod will not be happening any more....
Herd immunity will take around 3 years to achieve at infection rates similar to now with an acceptable CFR. That's three years of living like this. No thanks.
Three more years of this or lockdown until a vaccine turns up? On that basis, I will go for masks and distancing...
I've never used an android tablet, but these days I prefer my android phone experience to an iCrap & I use andriod apps on my Fire Stick that work well, what is the big flaw in android tablets?
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
It's not the real parliament, though. I imagine that bigass quakers get peerages on an ad hoc basis anyway and that the Free Church would turn them down on principle.
Lord Mackay of Clashfern is a counter-example (albeit through his legal role).
So did the BBC eg Saville and Rolf Harris, so did many schools, so did some football clubs eg Crewe, Manchester City and Chelsea with former coaches, so did some political parties with the likes of Cyril Smith and Peter Morrison, the sexual abuse in the 1970s and 1980s went across the establishment, the Church was only one element.
Plus Welby has correctly issued an unqualified apology today
It's very far from enough though.
(To my mind Rolf Harris isn't in this category)
The BBC, the Church, and many other organisations should be having to answer questions as to why they shouldn't be closed down forthwith.
A forcible closedown of the CoE would be interesting. It'd remove a good portion of idiocy from the House of Lords for example. Welby is obviously a witch anyway, so we should warm up the fires. (Not serious of course, but who'd he be to argue?)
Utter rubbish, you would have to close down the BBC, the Churches Anglican and Catholic and Imams were not immune either in covering up abuse.
Our major political parties, most of our top private schools, many of our top football clubs and their youth team coaches even the Scouts all had abusers within them, the importance is the lessons learned
Too important to have to answer the allegations then?
My utter rubbish seems to be your denial.
No, the Church is answering them as is every other Institution covered by the remit of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse
Coronavirus outbreak at Nottingham University as 425 students and eight staff test positive as city ‘days’ from lockdown
Why not just lock down the university?
Should have told anyone who wasn't worried about catching the virus to come early and stay in the Halls, have one big Freshers party. Treat it like Big Brother - we'll supply food and alcohol, only rule is you can't get out.
I suspect their lawyers would have fainted at the prospect! Not everyone is impervious at that age, unfortunately.
What risk would you be prepared to accept? I haven't got the latest numbers in front of me, but the number of healthy under 20s in England who have died of Covid-19 stood, on 19 August, as four.
Not four thousand.
Not four hundred.
Not forty.
Four.
A bit more background to that.
As of 3rd July, 651 under-nineteens were admitted to hospital for covid, concentrated in the range 4 months old to 14 years old. The majority of these (375) had no co-morbidities and were otherwise perfectly healthy.
Of these, 116 were admitted to ICU, all bar one of them needing ventilation (58 non-intrusive ventilation, 57 with intrusive ventilation). Of these 116, 47 also needed heart drugs.
Just under half of these 116 had no co-morbidities at all.
However, even if put into ICU and on a ventilator, children were very good at pulling through (albeit with significant suffering); only four actually died.
I love "healthy." What about the unhealthy ones? Where are they on the spectrum between "they don't really count" and "serve them right?"
What an absolutely horrible post – although sadly typical of you – of course they count, you nasty prat.
Sixteen children with comorbidities have died from Covid-19, four without, 20 in total.
It's also amazing that people seem happy to pose no solutions other than "lock everyone up forever for their own good" which is not a solution.
Exactly. PB being PB, over-represented by well off perhaps single (!) white blokes, the idea of locking everyone down comes easily and quickly. But it is impractical for economic, social, and psychological reasons.
We are going to have to come to terms with a modus vivendi that respects the virus but that works with it. We must not let it dominate us. Now....who said that....?
I think that we are creating a modus vivendi as you put it, and it is largely people being sensible. Increased distance and masks seem to be a way forward that lets most things happen rather than locking everything down.
Eventually there will be a vaccine or herd immunity will be achieved and things like pubs and cinemas can resume, but perhaps packing people in like peas in a pod will not be happening any more....
Herd immunity will take around 3 years to achieve at infection rates similar to now with an acceptable CFR. That's three years of living like this. No thanks.
Three more years of this or lockdown until a vaccine turns up? On that basis, I will go for masks and distancing...
Same here. (As long as I can keep gyms and travel I`ll survive.)
I appreciate the breathless excitement for the dazzling candidate, the second Obama, that is Joe Biden, but I would be wary of getting sucked into Biden now the markets have already moved.
I don't think anyone thinks he is dazzling or the second Obama. Just not being Donald Trump is good enough.
I preferred Warren and Sanders but I'm warming to Joe. I like him. Feel some affection even.
He's a decent guy. Old school. Harks back to better America. Yeh, he's old. But we can live with that. He's not dangerous and a self-monarchist and that's the alternative.
I think that we are creating a modus vivendi as you put it, and it is largely people being sensible. Increased distance and masks seem to be a way forward that lets most things happen rather than locking everything down.
Eventually there will be a vaccine or herd immunity will be achieved and things like pubs and cinemas can resume, but perhaps packing people in like peas in a pod will not be happening any more....
"...packing people in like peas in a pod..." represents some of the most important life experiences at any age.
This is not as I have repeated often on here a "let it rip" strategy but to protect those who most need protecting, to inform people (as if they're not already informed!) of the risks of spreading the disease, and to trust people beyond that.
As @contrarian has so often pointed out - once the administrative control genie is out of the bottle it is a huge challenge to put it back in. To say nothing of the economic damage. As to lockdowns, what is the strategy? Leicester is still in to no particular effect.
If it means not having pubs so packed you have to elbow your way through them or cinema seats so tightly packed that your elbow is in someone else's ribcage, then I will put up with that.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
Same here. Also just gone in biggish on Biden to win Pennsylvania which I now see as pretty much nailed on.
Please remember I urged caution at the time.
You think Trump could spring a surprise? I think the biggest risk for Biden at this point is if he caught Covid. The Dems must be surely be shielding him from more or less everyone at the moment one hopes.
I don;t think Biden is as far ahead as some of these polls are telling you. Many US polls in 2016 got things very, very wrong in favour of Clinton, and I would be wary of assuming they have corrected their methodology this time around.
And if I could pose a question to the group of posters (I think you know who you are) who are both keen punters and share my view that Trump will lose and it won't be close -
What iyo is a Fair Value sell price for Biden EC supremacy right now?
You need to stop wibbling about your bet.
Never close out, that`s my rule. But remind me what your bet is and on which market specifically - and what it is currently trading at.
Not sure I quite go with that rule but Ok I wibble no more. We're sorted. Kenny agrees that we stick at this point. He says the price is still too low and iho Texas is going. And he should know -
No I do get it. And the point is a good one. But you don't mean NEVER close. Say you buy something because you think it's underpriced and then having held it for a bit it goes iyo well overpriced. You sell it.
If you think it is overpriced then consider it a new bet (that just happens to be a close) not closing it.
Yes I think we are all on the same page.
Now then, "Boris", I missed his speech. Was it one of his best iyo? Did he rise to the occasion?
No and yes. His speech was fitting for the occasion, I wouldn't expect it to be one of his best in these circumstances.
Biden flailing throwing money at longshots because he needs a miracle.
Watching where people throw money has always seemed an odd premise, predicated as it is on the idea campaigns surely know better than we do what the situation is, which strikes me as unlikely. When they get it right it's probably just chance.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
No, especially as the Bishops are amongst the oldest members of the Lords, going back to medieval times when they along with noblemen and county and borough representatives advised the King. Plus the Lords Spiritual introduce Church Measures to the Lords.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
14.5K cases today an doubling, I think, in less than 10 days means Chris Whitty's non-prediction of 50K cases a day in October is quite plausible now
It's March all over again isn't it?
The extra precautions people are taking now are offset by the increased virus transmission during the flu season.
Without a vaccine we're looking at a lockdown every 6 months or so or are going to have to learn to live with the virus.
Lockdown every six months means what for the economy? five, six million unemployed permanently?
Until we can parachute them all into Boris's green jobs, of course.
Well yes I don't agree with the lockdowns, but if we're in the same position as we were in March I can't see why they wouldn't pursue the same policy.
Well I can see why they cannot pursue the came policy
They do not have any money left.
We didn't have any then, either. The exact same policy is less likely, I think, due to less pubilc compliance being likely. Not necessarily a majority or even close to it, but enough to render it pretty pointless. Consent is key.
So did the BBC eg Saville and Rolf Harris, so did many schools, so did some football clubs eg Crewe, Manchester City and Chelsea with former coaches, so did some political parties with the likes of Cyril Smith and Peter Morrison, the sexual abuse in the 1970s and 1980s went across the establishment, the Church was only one element.
Plus Welby has correctly issued an unqualified apology today
It's very far from enough though.
(To my mind Rolf Harris isn't in this category)
The BBC, the Church, and many other organisations should be having to answer questions as to why they shouldn't be closed down forthwith.
A forcible closedown of the CoE would be interesting. It'd remove a good portion of idiocy from the House of Lords for example. Welby is obviously a witch anyway, so we should warm up the fires. (Not serious of course, but who'd he be to argue?)
Utter rubbish, you would have to close down the BBC, the Churches Anglican and Catholic and Imams were not immune either in covering up abuse.
Our major political parties, most of our top private schools, many of our top football clubs and their youth team coaches even the Scouts all had abusers within them, the importance is the lessons learned
Too important to have to answer the allegations then?
My utter rubbish seems to be your denial.
No, the Church is answering them as is every other Institution covered by the remit of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
No, especially as the Bishops are amongst the oldest members of the Lords, going back to medieval times when they along with noblemen and county and borough representatives advised the King. Plus the Lords Spiritual introduce Church Measures to the Lords.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
No reason you couldn't have an appointed second chamber without them. By definition its a choice who gets appointed, they could easily remove them without sacrificing the principle of appointment as a whole. Or open it up to appointees of other faiths, who lack the historical connection but then as we are proud to note parliament has evolved over time.
Isn't focusing on non-swing states needed to win what Hilary did?
So predictable...
Biden spends money in PA,MI and WI: "He wouldn't be spending there if the polls were right - his campaign must know he is losing"
Biden spends money in TX and GA: "He's distracted from the states he needs to win"
A campaign should wake up everyday and assume it is losing and do something about it.
Sounds good, but that really would lead to things like throwing resources at safe seats, on the basis you cannot assume anywhere is safe. So is it assume you are losing in some specific way and address that, but in which case how to decide?
14.5K cases today an doubling, I think, in less than 10 days means Chris Whitty's non-prediction of 50K cases a day in October is quite plausible now
It's March all over again isn't it?
The extra precautions people are taking now are offset by the increased virus transmission during the flu season.
Without a vaccine we're looking at a lockdown every 6 months or so or are going to have to learn to live with the virus.
Lockdown every six months means what for the economy? five, six million unemployed permanently?
Until we can parachute them all into Boris's green jobs, of course.
Well yes I don't agree with the lockdowns, but if we're in the same position as we were in March I can't see why they wouldn't pursue the same policy.
In theory, better track and trace, more testing should mean even if now looks like March, in a month we shouldn't look like April, even without a full lockdown.
Also, I was pondering about spreading - we can get hung up about super-spreaders, but there will be some people who are more likely to catch and spread this disease due to behaviour, living conditions, job, physiology. If a disproportionate number of those people have had this already (having been at higher risk of getting infection) and have retained immunity then there may be a bit of a brake on infections this time, even allowing for everything else being the same - i.e. a greater reduction in R compared to March/April than would have been expected simply from the raw (quite small) percentage that have been infected already.
Isn't focusing on non-swing states needed to win what Hilary did?
So predictable...
Biden spends money in PA,MI and WI: "He wouldn't be spending there if the polls were right - his campaign must know he is losing"
Biden spends money in TX and GA: "He's distracted from the states he needs to win"
A campaign should wake up everyday and assume it is losing and do something about it.
Sounds good, but that really would lead to things like throwing resources at safe seats, on the basis you cannot assume anywhere is safe. So is it assume you are losing in some specific way and address that, but in which case how to decide?
Do all of the above. You don't need to do the same thing every day.
If Hillary had concentrated a bit more on safe states she might be seeking re-election now.
This has been the most surprising aspect to me, despite a huge rise in the infection rate over the last couple of weeks we're not seeing a resulting rise in the death rate. Not yet anyway. Even the hospitalisation rate doesn't seem as bad as it should be.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
No, especially as the Bishops are amongst the oldest members of the Lords, going back to medieval times when they along with noblemen and county and borough representatives advised the King. Plus the Lords Spiritual introduce Church Measures to the Lords.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
No reason you couldn't have an appointed second chamber without them. By definition its a choice who gets appointed, they could easily remove them without sacrificing the principle of appointment as a whole. Or open it up to appointees of other faiths, who lack the historical connection but then as we are proud to note parliament has evolved over time.
Or you could go back to the Lords as originally constituted ie Bishops and hereditaries and remove the life peers, many of whom are just retired politicians or party donors and supporters now.
Representatives of other faiths are in the Lords anyway eg the Chief Rabbi normally ends up in the Lords and there are Muslim and Hindu peers too now.
Catholic Cardinals in the UK though usually turn down a peerage as the Church does not generally permit them to be legislators or serve any other body than the Vatican
I have a Tab 2, and have had 3 Galaxy phones. I've seen too many build problems (usually the charging socket) and grown weary of the Samsung version of Android to recommend any of their stuff to anyone any more.
Some wag suggested an iPad - yes fine if you can stomach iOS. If not, buy a Pixel Slate instead.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
It's not the real parliament, though. I imagine that bigass quakers get peerages on an ad hoc basis anyway and that the Free Church would turn them down on principle.
Lord Mackay of Clashfern was a Wee Wee Free until he very correctly told them where to stick it. Of course his ennoblement had not much to do with his religion.
That was when he was told not to attend the funerals of some Catholic colleagues and friends?
God bless sectarianism, it stops Scots being racist, they don't have the time.
This has been the most surprising aspect to me, despite a huge rise in the infection rate over the last couple of weeks we're not seeing a resulting rise in the death rate. Not yet anyway. Even the hospitalisation rate doesn't seem as bad as it should be.
I'd have to dig through the latest infection survey, but I believe there were some indications that the demographic of those infected is changing - more older people.
I rather suspect that what we are seeing is March all over again - but this time we are seeing a large chunk of the asymptomatic cases.
Biden flailing throwing money at longshots because he needs a miracle.
Watching where people throw money has always seemed an odd premise, predicated as it is on the idea campaigns surely know better than we do what the situation is, which strikes me as unlikely. When they get it right it's probably just chance.
The Obama campaign had a level of data analysis far beyond what was available to the average punter. They famously made an ad buy in a local Alabama TV market because the broadcast area also covered a (very small) portion of Florida.
One of the many disasterous mistake the Clinton campaign made was believing the public polls and failing to engage the Obama data team that was basically intact at civis analytics. The Biden campaign has consulted them.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
No, especially as the Bishops are amongst the oldest members of the Lords, going back to medieval times when they along with noblemen and county and borough representatives advised the King. Plus the Lords Spiritual introduce Church Measures to the Lords.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
Let me get this right. You really do think that a primitive, barely post-mediaeval theocracy, crudely altered with the political equivalent of a sledgehammer to let Henry VIII do his mating as he wished, is suitable for the third millennium CE [edit - not BC!]. And to hell with anyone who is not in the C of E (and very specifically England - Welsh, Nirish and Scottish Episcopalians do not count).
On that same logic you should, for instance, be pushing to execute shoplifters at Tyburn (unless they are posh, in which case it is Tower Green).
Gonna need to ramp that up a long way if we want to get 2.5 million students infected in under a month.
Need an average of 100,000 infections per day just amongst the students.
Herd immunity will be substantially less. I suspect we will have it amongst students within a couple of weeks.
Herd immunity slowly kicks in from around 60%, which is 2 million, that would still be a huge number, and remember students do also meet a few older people.
I don't think that figure has been shown for this virus. See Gupta at Oxford et al.
Of course it should be 1.5 million (oops!)
The 60% was just what everyone else has been using, for vaccines the proportion for herd immunitiy is often put at 80% or 90%, but in practice herd immunity is not binary, it will slowly kick in this kind of region. The main point is, we are a long way from any herd immunity worth talking about unless we start vaccinating millions of people.
Biden flailing throwing money at longshots because he needs a miracle.
Watching where people throw money has always seemed an odd premise, predicated as it is on the idea campaigns surely know better than we do what the situation is, which strikes me as unlikely. When they get it right it's probably just chance.
In this case it may well be the Biden camp has money to burn, so Texas is as good a place as any to do so. In terms of winning the Presidency, it's unimportant. If Texas does flip, he's already home and dry. The bragging rights are colossal though.
I have to admit, I hadn't thought this would be one of the charges brought against the man (from the BBC):
The trial of Sudan's former President Omar al-Bashir for his role in the coup that brought him to power in 1989 has resumed in the capital, Khartoum...
Along with several military personnel and civilians, Bashir is accused of plotting the coup that saw him stay in power for almost 30 years.
A judge rejected his plea to drop the case because so much time had elapsed...
He was overthrown in a coup in April 2019 following mass protests against his rule.
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
They can always stand for election.
Plus quite frankly the less we have Wee Freers near power the better.
So get rid of the Anglican hierarchy in the HoL - they too can stand for election.
No, especially as the Bishops are amongst the oldest members of the Lords, going back to medieval times when they along with noblemen and county and borough representatives advised the King. Plus the Lords Spiritual introduce Church Measures to the Lords.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
Let me get this right. You really do think that a primitive, barely post-mediaeval theocracy, crudely altered with the political equivalent of a sledgehammer to let Henry VIII do his mating as he wished, is suitable for the third millennium CE [edit - not BC!]. And to hell with anyone who is not in the C of E (and very specifically England - Welsh, Nirish and Scottish Episcopalians do not count).
On that same logic you should, for instance, be pushing to execute shoplifters at Tyburn (unless they are posh, in which case it is Tower Green).
I am a traditional Tory, crown and established Church being the cornerstone of the nation.
As for the death penalty, if you had a referendum on it it might well be brought back (though I am not personally in favour, except perhaps for serial killers)
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
It's not the real parliament, though. I imagine that bigass quakers get peerages on an ad hoc basis anyway and that the Free Church would turn them down on principle.
Lord Mackay of Clashfern was a Wee Wee Free until he very correctly told them where to stick it. Of course his ennoblement had not much to do with his religion.
That was when he was told not to attend the funerals of some Catholic colleagues and friends?
God bless sectarianism, it stops Scots being racist, they don't have the time.
You're forgetting that a lot of the members of that particular Free Church [there are several] were so unhappy with the affair, partly over the liberty of conscience issue, that it led to a split in that kirk. Never mind what many Scots more generally thought.
Herd immunity is achieved at 1-1/Rnaught in theory. But in practice heterogeneity in the population at large, and public health measures like social distancing, hand and oral hygiene, will bring down the effective R naught, and hence greatly lower the rate at which we benefit from herd immunity - perhaps to as low as 20%. See:
I am right in thinking it is only the UK and Iran that have unelected clergy in their Parliaments?
And an appallingly unrepresentative selection, both in terms of geography and of belief (and lack of), of the UK. If you are a Free Churcher in Lewis, or a Quaker in Somerset, hard luck.
It's not the real parliament, though. I imagine that bigass quakers get peerages on an ad hoc basis anyway and that the Free Church would turn them down on principle.
Lord Mackay of Clashfern was a Wee Wee Free until he very correctly told them where to stick it. Of course his ennoblement had not much to do with his religion.
That was when he was told not to attend the funerals of some Catholic colleagues and friends?
God bless sectarianism, it stops Scots being racist, they don't have the time.
You're forgetting that a lot of the members of that particular Free Church [there are several] were so unhappy with the affair, partly over the liberty of conscience issue, that it led to a split in that kirk. Never mind what many Scots more generally thought.
I still can't get my head around that some people thought going to a Catholic funeral was a great sin worthy of excommunication.
Isn't focusing on non-swing states needed to win what Hilary did?
So predictable...
Biden spends money in PA,MI and WI: "He wouldn't be spending there if the polls were right - his campaign must know he is losing"
Biden spends money in TX and GA: "He's distracted from the states he needs to win"
A campaign should wake up everyday and assume it is losing and do something about it.
Sounds good, but that really would lead to things like throwing resources at safe seats, on the basis you cannot assume anywhere is safe. So is it assume you are losing in some specific way and address that, but in which case how to decide?
Do all of the above. You don't need to do the same thing every day.
If Hillary had concentrated a bit more on safe states she might be seeking re-election now.
Her campaign deliberately diverted resources away from Michigan to campaign in Ohio.
The reason I lost money in 2016 was I assumed her campaign staff were competent and that turned out to be a gigantic error. They actively avoided involving anyone involved in the Obama wins. Utter cretins.
This has been the most surprising aspect to me, despite a huge rise in the infection rate over the last couple of weeks we're not seeing a resulting rise in the death rate. Not yet anyway. Even the hospitalisation rate doesn't seem as bad as it should be.
Have you been looking at the same graphs? UK deaths were at a vey low level in early September, but the 7 day average no. deaths has doubled twice in under 20 days. It is still not at disaster levels, but there is a steady increase, which nobody should be complacent about.
Biden flailing throwing money at longshots because he needs a miracle.
Watching where people throw money has always seemed an odd premise, predicated as it is on the idea campaigns surely know better than we do what the situation is, which strikes me as unlikely. When they get it right it's probably just chance.
In this case it may well be the Biden camp has money to burn, so Texas is as good a place as any to do so. In terms of winning the Presidency, it's unimportant. If Texas does flip, he's already home and dry. The bragging rights are colossal though.
Texas is getting Bluer by the year. Putting effort into Texas forces Trump to put more in - and I believe Biden has a full war chest, and the Trump campaign doesn't.
Even if he doesn't win Texas, the effort will help Democratic candidates for office within the state and build good will with the party there.
Biden flailing throwing money at longshots because he needs a miracle.
Watching where people throw money has always seemed an odd premise, predicated as it is on the idea campaigns surely know better than we do what the situation is, which strikes me as unlikely. When they get it right it's probably just chance.
In this case it may well be the Biden camp has money to burn, so Texas is as good a place as any to do so. In terms of winning the Presidency, it's unimportant. If Texas does flip, he's already home and dry. The bragging rights are colossal though.
Texas is also worth going for in the long term too. It has been moving more Dem. If it were to flip, say in 2028, then the Dems could win EC whilst losing the popular vote. It would also require the GOP to start spending time and money there. Oops @Malmesbury said it earlier and better.
Comments
"...packing people in like peas in a pod..." represents some of the most important life experiences at any age.
This is not as I have repeated often on here a "let it rip" strategy but to protect those who most need protecting, to inform people (as if they're not already informed!) of the risks of spreading the disease, and to trust people beyond that.
As @contrarian has so often pointed out - once the administrative control genie is out of the bottle it is a huge challenge to put it back in. To say nothing of the economic damage. As to lockdowns, what is the strategy? Leicester is still in to no particular effect.
It's wearing to have people ignore you, or caricature you.
But when alternatives are offered to you, and the real practical problems with your suggestions are spelt out, they are ignored.
So why go through the whole thing again?
If about one in twenty people had had it at that time, and the proportion was common across all age bands (to be honest, it wasn't - it was tilted towards the elderly thanks to the fuck-up with care homes), then we can scale up by a factor of twenty for the entire population.
I've chucked another big one on Biden.
Mafia III is great because it had a black main character...
https://www.wired.com/story/mafia-definitive-edition-remake-review
Except everybody who actually played these games, Mafia and Mafia II are bloody great and Mafia III was utter pile of garbage.
Calculation note: based on change in 7 day rolling average compared to 7 days ago. The 16k additional cases have been spread evenly over the 8 days prior to report, so for today 8k been added to last week & 8k subtracted from this week.
(I calculated at 1.27 yesterday, and that compared with a last available sample date value of 1.29 with the 16k cases added in. Note that, before the correction, even using sample date last week wouldn't have saved you from estimating R low).
Given hospitalisations are running at about 10-15% of peak, that R rate would now put us around one month away, nationally, of the peak daily hospitalisation levels seen in late March.
The extra precautions people are taking now are offset by the increased virus transmission during the flu season.
Without a vaccine we're looking at a lockdown every 6 months or so or are going to have to learn to live with the virus.
Until we can parachute them all into Boris's green jobs, of course.
If I thought the markets were reacting to polling it would be a excellent trading strategy.
Now then, "Boris", I missed his speech. Was it one of his best iyo? Did he rise to the occasion?
We know that covid infections can't be exponential, although at low levels that is certainly the case. I've yet to see anyone who has bothered to fit the known constraints to their model in this.
Luckily for Trump, I suspect.
Once again he is front and centre. Or if you are American, Center
Biden spends money in PA,MI and WI: "He wouldn't be spending there if the polls were right - his campaign must know he is losing"
Biden spends money in TX and GA: "He's distracted from the states he needs to win"
They do not have any money left.
Either you have a wholly elected second chamber, in which case the Bishops go along with all the other current peers, or you have an appointed second chamber as now in which case they stay
https://twitter.com/drsimonegold/status/1313199258393145344
Just how much did you have on?
But it shows what a failure the last lockdown was in hindsight if we're back in the exact same position again 6 months later.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1313510692851462145?s=09
Also, I was pondering about spreading - we can get hung up about super-spreaders, but there will be some people who are more likely to catch and spread this disease due to behaviour, living conditions, job, physiology. If a disproportionate number of those people have had this already (having been at higher risk of getting infection) and have retained immunity then there may be a bit of a brake on infections this time, even allowing for everything else being the same - i.e. a greater reduction in R compared to March/April than would have been expected simply from the raw (quite small) percentage that have been infected already.
(I must be feeling optimistic today!)
Then again you'd think Starmer was the second coming the way some talk about him.
Ben Westcott, CNN"
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/06/asia/china-global-reputation-coronavirus-intl-hnk/index.html
The worst flu season in the last 20 years was 61k, the year when we guessed the wrong flu strains to vaccinate against.
If Hillary had concentrated a bit more on safe states she might be seeking re-election now.
Its worse because a gargantuan amount of resource has gone into 'defeating' something that, in the end, cannot be 'defeated'.
In short, what I have been calling it since March. The worst policy decision by any British government, ever.
Representatives of other faiths are in the Lords anyway eg the Chief Rabbi normally ends up in the Lords and there are Muslim and Hindu peers too now.
Catholic Cardinals in the UK though usually turn down a peerage as the Church does not generally permit them to be legislators or serve any other body than the Vatican
Some wag suggested an iPad - yes fine if you can stomach iOS. If not, buy a Pixel Slate instead.
God bless sectarianism, it stops Scots being racist, they don't have the time.
I rather suspect that what we are seeing is March all over again - but this time we are seeing a large chunk of the asymptomatic cases.
One of the many disasterous mistake the Clinton campaign made was believing the public polls and failing to engage the Obama data team that was basically intact at civis analytics. The Biden campaign has consulted them.
On that same logic you should, for instance, be pushing to execute shoplifters at Tyburn (unless they are posh, in which case it is Tower Green).
The 60% was just what everyone else has been using, for vaccines the proportion for herd immunitiy is often put at 80% or 90%, but in practice herd immunity is not binary, it will slowly kick in this kind of region. The main point is, we are a long way from any herd immunity worth talking about unless we start vaccinating millions of people.
The trial of Sudan's former President Omar al-Bashir for his role in the coup that brought him to power in 1989 has resumed in the capital, Khartoum...
Along with several military personnel and civilians, Bashir is accused of plotting the coup that saw him stay in power for almost 30 years.
A judge rejected his plea to drop the case because so much time had elapsed...
He was overthrown in a coup in April 2019 following mass protests against his rule.
I mean, what if is found not guilty?
As for the death penalty, if you had a referendum on it it might well be brought back (though I am not personally in favour, except perhaps for serial killers)
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-tricky-math-of-covid-19-herd-immunity-20200630/
The reason I lost money in 2016 was I assumed her campaign staff were competent and that turned out to be a gigantic error. They actively avoided involving anyone involved in the Obama wins. Utter cretins.
UK deaths were at a vey low level in early September, but the 7 day average no. deaths has doubled twice in under 20 days. It is still not at disaster levels, but there is a steady increase, which nobody should be complacent about.
Even if he doesn't win Texas, the effort will help Democratic candidates for office within the state and build good will with the party there.
It would also require the GOP to start spending time and money there.
Oops @Malmesbury said it earlier and better.