Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Absolute tossers.
Put those roasters at the back of the list for the vaccine and also ban them from receiving NHS treatment for a year.
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
That's inspired me, thanks. I've been trying to lose two stones, but have so far only lost two pounds. I shall forgive myself and keep on trying!
Apart from the very sensible advice from @Southam (eat less, exercise more) - I would add the following:
1) cut out alcohol at least for a while (maybe impossible in lockdown). 2) plan out and have a set menu every day so you know what you are going to eat, whether it's a fancy menu plan, or something you do (eg. mass cook carrots, broccoli, etc and dollop it out each meal time). 3) have a good breakfast (not sausage, egg and chips - but toast and marmalade or somesuch). 4) don't eat between meals 5) make the menu boring with a treat once a day. 6) don't weigh yourself every day.
I'm sure you know all this so apols if so.
I'd vouch for 2). Not doing that I seemed to automatically put on more than doing so.
But if you are quite heavy I actually found 6) motivating, as simply walking quite a bit (not even jogging) and cutting down foot intake there was a notable decrease day on day. Once the first, easy pounds were done, I stopped though.
Even though it is silly I'd also eat dinner pretty early, no snacking, and then weigh myself first thing - since it had been 12 hours+, I was definitely at my lightest for the day!
But I need to start doing it properly again, i've gotten chunky once more. Put back on 2 stone of the 3.5 I had lost.
Yes you're right - at the beginning it is very encouraging to see how you are actually losing weight.
I think diets work for most people (whether carrots and cabbage or chocolate cake) because they are doing something they hadn't done before - regulating their eating. In almost all cases just doing that will make a huge difference. Oh and the booze...
The booze is a right b'stard, isn't it? I managed to cut down by making a promise to myself to not have any alcohol the night before a day at work and that gives me at least 3 nights a week where I can't drink. I wasn't a boozer, but like a whisky or rum in my hand of an evening. It really helped, and now I only really drink at weekends if I'm not at work. One other thing.... going to a plant based diet really, really helped. At a stroke it cuts out cream cakes and chocolate. I'm fitter, leaner, sleep better, lifting more in the gym and with less (fewer? I can't be arsed!) aches and pains than I can ever remember. Diet is key, though. Not dieting. Eat better, move more, really does work, and as you say, if you fall off the wagon, reset yourself then climb back on.
Putting calorific values on bottles would probably be a better aid to general health than putting on alcohol volumes.
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
On Boxing Day, I decided to get fit, and have lost over 7kgs in the last four weeks.
It was done by a combination of Peloton, no alcohol, and eating healthily.
I shifted 4st 9 between April and September 2019. Primarily Slimming World, sped up a little by more exercise. Good timing, given how vulnerable fatties are to Covid.
My take away from that experience (and previous failures) is that it's all about breaking down and reforming bad eating habits. Exercise can help you lose weight a bit quicker, but it has to be done first and foremost for its own sake. If you try to keep eating a load of crap, whilst relying on the workouts to get all the weight off, then this always fails in the long run.
I think the pay-off from cutting calories is quicker and deeper than trying to excercise it off. Takes a lot of time on the rowing machine to knock off a Mars bar`s calories.
I disagree with some of Topping`s points below - but I guess different things work for different people.
Will-power is all - for me. I don`t allow my weight to go above 74kg. If it does I reform what I eat. Simple as that.
I`m lucky in that I don`t need breakfast, usually go to 1 pm before I eat anything and can go right through to dinner if I need to. That works for me. I`ve never understood people who say that they wake up hungry. It`s the only time of the day when I`m NOT hungry.
The other thing I`d say is to focus on foods that maximum flavour yet are low calorie (which means v. low carbs). Pickles work: pickled eggs, pickled jalapenos, sauerkraut (a gift for slimmers, that). Also, tomatoes, tuna (in water only), onions. You can feast on that stuff at very low calories.
Whey protein shakes stave off the hunger too and are delicious if you pick the right one and are also looking for a muscle-building hit. Building muscle aids fat loss as it keeps your metabolism high even on days you don`t work out.
Yep. Never assume that this thing can't get any worse, because it always can and it usually will.
You are too gloomy (imo) but you aren't catastrophizing. I think we'll start a slow return to normality this Spring and will be there by next Summer but it's not certain. I reckon there's about a 10% chance of a mini black swan. Covid lives now, it's had its big bang, and with life comes possibilities. It might mutate to become more infectious, more resilient to vaccines, more deadly to the old, more dangerous to the young. Even if it doesn't there's a massive challenge in getting it under control not just in a few countries but globally. And then there's the psychological impact and behavioural change. Some of this could be here for keeps. I think it's good to hold these bleaker prospects in mind as well as the more rational hope and expectation that we'll soon be over the worst.
To be fair, Black Rook is often accused of being too gloomy - only to find out after some time that the gloom is upon us.
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
That's inspired me, thanks. I've been trying to lose two stones, but have so far only lost two pounds. I shall forgive myself and keep on trying!
Apart from the very sensible advice from @Southam (eat less, exercise more) - I would add the following:
1) cut out alcohol at least for a while (maybe impossible in lockdown). 2) plan out and have a set menu every day so you know what you are going to eat, whether it's a fancy menu plan, or something you do (eg. mass cook carrots, broccoli, etc and dollop it out each meal time). 3) have a good breakfast (not sausage, egg and chips - but toast and marmalade or somesuch). 4) don't eat between meals 5) make the menu boring with a treat once a day. 6) don't weigh yourself every day.
I'm sure you know all this so apols if so.
I'd vouch for 2). Not doing that I seemed to automatically put on more than doing so.
But if you are quite heavy I actually found 6) motivating, as simply walking quite a bit (not even jogging) and cutting down foot intake there was a notable decrease day on day. Once the first, easy pounds were done, I stopped though.
Even though it is silly I'd also eat dinner pretty early, no snacking, and then weigh myself first thing - since it had been 12 hours+, I was definitely at my lightest for the day!
But I need to start doing it properly again, i've gotten chunky once more. Put back on 2 stone of the 3.5 I had lost.
Yes you're right - at the beginning it is very encouraging to see how you are actually losing weight.
I think diets work for most people (whether carrots and cabbage or chocolate cake) because they are doing something they hadn't done before - regulating their eating. In almost all cases just doing that will make a huge difference. Oh and the booze...
The booze is a right b'stard, isn't it? I managed to cut down by making a promise to myself to not have any alcohol the night before a day at work and that gives me at least 3 nights a week where I can't drink. I wasn't a boozer, but like a whisky or rum in my hand of an evening. It really helped, and now I only really drink at weekends if I'm not at work. One other thing.... going to a plant based diet really, really helped. At a stroke it cuts out cream cakes and chocolate. I'm fitter, leaner, sleep better, lifting more in the gym and with less (fewer? I can't be arsed!) aches and pains than I can ever remember. Diet is key, though. Not dieting. Eat better, move more, really does work, and as you say, if you fall off the wagon, reset yourself then climb back on.
Putting calorific values on bottles would probably be a better aid to general health than putting on alcohol volumes.
What I want to know is which f*cker put calories in alcohol.....looking at my Friday evening G&T and packet of crisps I was not going to eat all of.....
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
Evidence new variant associated with a higher degree of mortality
How convenient!
Just as the pressure to end lockdown increases!
We are never getting out. Until we say we are.
That is a bonkers idea. For all his bluster and incompetence, an extended lockdown is the last thing Boris Johnson wants to convey to you. He is straining at the leash to let you party.
Reporting back from my Covid jab. Met at the door of Boots by a security guard to check that you are there for the vaccine. Taken to a member of staff who takes you to the back of the store and passes you on to a desk where there is a print-out of those booked in. Asked if you have any of the symptoms, hand sanitised, and then taken to seat in individual booths. After a few minutes taken through to another waiting area before been ushered into one of two surgeries. Checked with a laptop database to make sure you are who you say you are, asked a series of questions about medical record, tolerance of injections, etc. Then jabbed by a trained pharmacist. Finally taken to first waiting area for 15 minute wait to seen if there are any reactions. All the staff appeared to be Boots' employees with the possible exception of the security guards. The vaccine was Astra Zeneca.
Any reminder that you should continue to distance as before the first jab?
This forum used to be all about politics - now it seems to be a home for narcissistic weight watchers.
Anyway, the case and death numbers are sobering for a Friday evening (whether you've given up on alcohol or not) and while some MP who has obviously too much time on his hands tweets about anything and everything, the fact remains we are still in the middle of a serious public health crisis.
I see the American conservatives (or Sore Losers Anonymous) are already laying into Biden because of some glib remark at a press conference. The likes of Sean Hannity have decided to be on the barricades of opposition from minute one - well, fair enough, it's politics.
The PMI numbers were also sobering (put down the home made booze in the cheap seats). At 38.8, the flash number for Services was poor but well off the historic lows of last spring. I imagine companies are finding ways round the lockdown restrictions which aren't of course as stringent as in the spring. Manufacturing came in at 52.9, still down on December but not perhaps as bad as feared.
These numbers will all bounce dramatically when cosseted home workers like me (apparently) can go out and spend all the cash we've been piling up over the past 10 months. The borrowing figures make even sobering reading and resolving the deficit is going to be a big challenge for Sunak who faces having to do things which will make him unpopular which is the curse of the Chancellor.
No one thanks you when things are going well but put up taxes and you become Public Enemy No.1 overnight which is why the Prime Minister has you close when it's going well and at a distance when it's not.
Government could intervene to STOP the City of London toppling statues to William Beckford and Sir John Cass over slave trade links for going against policy to 'learn from the past'
I studied history to SYS level at school and got an A despite using books not statues as my primary source of information. What if the thing you learn from the past is that you shouldn't put bad people on plinths?
I learned from the Statue of Liberty that the American Revolution was won by Amazons.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Many more now.
If they are under 60 and they don;t pass it on to grandad, or grandad's been vaccinated, then who cares? its either harmless or a bit unpleasant.
Case rates are meaningless after vaccination, surely?
Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Many more now.
If they are under 60 and they don;t pass it on to grandad, or grandad's been vaccinated, then who cares? its either harmless or a bit unpleasant.
Case rates are meaningless after vaccination, surely?
Not every vulnerable person has been vaccinated. Not even close.
Yep. Never assume that this thing can't get any worse, because it always can and it usually will.
You are too gloomy (imo) but you aren't catastrophizing. I think we'll start a slow return to normality this Spring and will be there by next Summer but it's not certain. I reckon there's about a 10% chance of a mini black swan. Covid lives now, it's had its big bang, and with life comes possibilities. It might mutate to become more infectious, more resilient to vaccines, more deadly to the old, more dangerous to the young. Even if it doesn't there's a massive challenge in getting it under control not just in a few countries but globally. And then there's the psychological impact and behavioural change. Some of this could be here for keeps. I think it's good to hold these bleaker prospects in mind as well as the more rational hope and expectation that we'll soon be over the worst.
To be fair, Black Rook is often accused of being too gloomy - only to find out after some time that the gloom is upon us.
I sometimes overcook it because I'm getting very worn down by this whole experience (I'm both fed up of the restrictions and the total lack of control, and I'm surrounded by relatives and close friends who are either old or shielding and whom I am therefore terrified will catch the thing and die,) and thus I'm prone to Jeremiads.
OTOH, I correctly predicted well in advance the rapid descent into chaos and the new lockdown in early January, for example (in fact I nominated the 8th as House Arrest Day and it happened on the 4th, so on that occasion I was slightly overoptimistic!)
What I always say when I come over all miserablist about things keeping on going pear-shaped, and the prospect of the whole catastrophe dragging on and on interminably, is that I hope - sincerely - that my pessimism isn't borne out. It's just that sometimes, it is. That's all.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
I wonder if anyone has ever pointed out to you that hospitalisation happens in significant numbers at all ages.......surely it is not possible that this is pointed out several times each and every week.......there is being a contrarian which can be great and then there is stubbornly ignoring reality.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
On topic, the question that McConnell and co have is do they feel they need to purge Trump?
And my guess is that the less we hear from Trump (and he has no voice right now), the less they feel the urge to purge.
The more pressing question surely is whether Trump feels he has the need to purge McConnell and Co?
Surely what is happening to Liz Cheney in Wyoming and in the house suggests that the balance of power in the republican party is with Trump.
Liz Cheney is being primaried. But the primary is not for another 18 months. We don't know yet if she'll fight off her challenger or not.
And I think this is a complex area: Ben Sasse was very anti-Trump and was primaried in Nebraska by an extremely well funded pro-Trump Matt Inis. Sasse hammered him 75:25.
Something that sometimes gets forgotten is that a significant element of "support" for a leader will come from tribalists who support them because they are "their" leader. When the leadership changes that doesn't mean they then support the old leaders spiritual successor, they support the new leader. Whoever that may be.
On this site you see that with some on the left like Nick Palmer who happily supported Blair through to Corbyn and now Starmer.
So many of those who say they support Trump really mean they support the GOP nominee whoever that is. That for them can transfer to supporting Sasse rather than Inis.
The actual hardcore Trumpists will be a tiny fraction of GOP voters and will only be truly visible by seeing who remains a hardcore Trumpist even after the GOP have moved on.
On here there were many Corbyn supporters last year. Now I can only think of bigjohnowls who is left carrying the torch for him. The party has moved on as will the GOP.
Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Many more now.
If they are under 60 and they don;t pass it on to grandad, or grandad's been vaccinated, then who cares? its either harmless or a bit unpleasant.
Case rates are meaningless after vaccination, surely?
Not every vulnerable person has been vaccinated. Not even close.
And the vaccine isn't 100% effective, so if you allow an uncontrolled epidemic in members of the population you believe are not at risk (which is a bad assumption anyway), you will still get avoidable deaths. Plus the hospitalisation rate is too high to ignore, even among under 40s.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
Sorry, were you watching a press conference from the middle of February? They were talking about case rates today.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
Nonsense absolutely untrue. Don't share lies please or actually understand what is going on.
There are principles that can back your position but when all you can share is untruths like this then it just seems you fail to grasp the gravity of the situation.
Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Many more now.
If they are under 60 and they don;t pass it on to grandad, or grandad's been vaccinated, then who cares? its either harmless or a bit unpleasant.
Case rates are meaningless after vaccination, surely?
The average age of Covid cases in ICU is around 60.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
Over 8% of 50-59 year olds who get infected require hospitalisation. How many times have you ended up in hospital with a bad cold?
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
Severe lung damage in all symptomatic cases and 70% of asymptomatic ones
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
The vaccine programme 'should' end in the middle of February? No one's going to force you to take it, so what's your objection to the rest of us getting it?
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
Congratulations, that’s seriously impressive. I’m happy with half a stone in Dry January, consuming less and exercising more.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
The vaccine programme 'should' end in the middle of February? No one's going to force you to take it, so what's your objection to the rest of us getting it?
Why would HMG vaccinate anyone other than the blue rinse brigade? Seems a bit pointless to me.
Johnson has significantly toned down his boosterish optimism - probably about time....
I noticed that as well and it is welcome
No more over promising is wise
Yep, we're going to be completely locked up until the entirety of JCVI Phase One is completed I think. After that, we might get some kind of tentative plan for what comes next, although we may not get very much liberalisation at all for a while, and the scientists may insist that we continue to be locked up for the entire Summer as well until the whole of the remainder of the adult population has been lanced.
Given that completion of Phase One could take us up to some point in May or possibly even June, I certainly think there's a non-negligible possibility that most children won't be back into school again until September. If it gets late enough into the academic year then, assuming the Summer holidays take place as normal, the powers that be may well conclude that there's no point in bringing the kids back for about five minutes and simply write the remaining classroom time off.
Interesting comment from the PM press conference - if 1 in 35 in London are infected - then the likelihood is that around a dozen out of the 400 at that wedding were already infected....
Any idea why 400 £10k fines haven’t been handed out?
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
Well done, SO. Really pleased to hear this.
What was your secret? I tried for 3-4 weeks and then get nowhere, disillusioned (and very hungry).
My secret was:
1. Don't drink alcohol for a couple of weeks. 2. Exercise - even if it's only 15 minutes. 3. Avoid carbs in the evening.
On topic, the question that McConnell and co have is do they feel they need to purge Trump?
And my guess is that the less we hear from Trump (and he has no voice right now), the less they feel the urge to purge.
Yes, he might be saved from conviction by twitter.
Cruel ironies.
It's not an issue that has exercised me greatly and I won't be betting on it but it seems to me the delay is double-edged.
If it all goes quiet and Trump is a good boy the will to convict will diminish but there's another possibility that in the time before the trial increasingly damning evidence emerges. If so, he will go down, and not in a happy way.
We just can't tell yet how this thing is likely to end.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
The vaccine programme 'should' end in the middle of February? No one's going to force you to take it, so what's your objection to the rest of us getting it?
Typical Corbynista, trying to enforce you not to do something he doesn't want to do.
On topic, the question that McConnell and co have is do they feel they need to purge Trump?
And my guess is that the less we hear from Trump (and he has no voice right now), the less they feel the urge to purge.
Yes, he might be saved from conviction by twitter.
Cruel ironies.
It's not an issue that has exercised me greatly and I won't be betting on it but it seems to me the delay is double-edged.
If it all goes quiet and Trump is a good boy the will to convict will diminish but there's another possibility that in the time before the trial increasingly damning evidence emerges. If so, he will go down, and not in a happy way.
We just can't tell yet how this thing is likely to end.
The one thing I don;t understand the obsession with case rates.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
The case rates now are important because if restrictions were lifted tomorrow the numbers would literally explode out of control. And we are still a long way off all the vulnerable being vaccinated.
Again, after the vaccination programme, which should end in the middle of February, who cares? for most people under 60 its either nothing or a bad cold.
The vaccine programme 'should' end in the middle of February? No one's going to force you to take it, so what's your objection to the rest of us getting it?
Typical Corbynista, trying to enforce you not to do something he doesn't want to do.
This was not a response to PtP's post. Chinese phone going rogue on me again.
Today, I hit a weight loss of 4 stone (56lbs for those in the US; approximately 26kgs - I think - in new money) since I decided to stop being a fat git on 21st July last year. If I can do it, anyone can. Seriously. It's really simple: eat and drink less, exercise more. Forgive yourself when you bugger up, as you will. But always go again. Never stop trying. It's so worth it. That is all.
That's inspired me, thanks. I've been trying to lose two stones, but have so far only lost two pounds. I shall forgive myself and keep on trying!
Apart from the very sensible advice from @Southam (eat less, exercise more) - I would add the following:
1) cut out alcohol at least for a while (maybe impossible in lockdown). 2) plan out and have a set menu every day so you know what you are going to eat, whether it's a fancy menu plan, or something you do (eg. mass cook carrots, broccoli, etc and dollop it out each meal time). 3) have a good breakfast (not sausage, egg and chips - but toast and marmalade or somesuch). 4) don't eat between meals 5) make the menu boring with a treat once a day. 6) don't weigh yourself every day.
I'm sure you know all this so apols if so.
I'd vouch for 2). Not doing that I seemed to automatically put on more than doing so.
But if you are quite heavy I actually found 6) motivating, as simply walking quite a bit (not even jogging) and cutting down foot intake there was a notable decrease day on day. Once the first, easy pounds were done, I stopped though.
Even though it is silly I'd also eat dinner pretty early, no snacking, and then weigh myself first thing - since it had been 12 hours+, I was definitely at my lightest for the day!
But I need to start doing it properly again, i've gotten chunky once more. Put back on 2 stone of the 3.5 I had lost.
Yes you're right - at the beginning it is very encouraging to see how you are actually losing weight.
I think diets work for most people (whether carrots and cabbage or chocolate cake) because they are doing something they hadn't done before - regulating their eating. In almost all cases just doing that will make a huge difference. Oh and the booze...
The booze is a right b'stard, isn't it? I managed to cut down by making a promise to myself to not have any alcohol the night before a day at work and that gives me at least 3 nights a week where I can't drink. I wasn't a boozer, but like a whisky or rum in my hand of an evening. It really helped, and now I only really drink at weekends if I'm not at work. One other thing.... going to a plant based diet really, really helped. At a stroke it cuts out cream cakes and chocolate. I'm fitter, leaner, sleep better, lifting more in the gym and with less (fewer? I can't be arsed!) aches and pains than I can ever remember. Diet is key, though. Not dieting. Eat better, move more, really does work, and as you say, if you fall off the wagon, reset yourself then climb back on.
Putting calorific values on bottles would probably be a better aid to general health than putting on alcohol volumes.
What I want to know is which f*cker put calories in alcohol.....looking at my Friday evening G&T and packet of crisps I was not going to eat all of.....
Most of my bottles already have calorific values on them.
Comments
Put those roasters at the back of the list for the vaccine and also ban them from receiving NHS treatment for a year.
I disagree with some of Topping`s points below - but I guess different things work for different people.
Will-power is all - for me. I don`t allow my weight to go above 74kg. If it does I reform what I eat. Simple as that.
I`m lucky in that I don`t need breakfast, usually go to 1 pm before I eat anything and can go right through to dinner if I need to. That works for me. I`ve never understood people who say that they wake up hungry. It`s the only time of the day when I`m NOT hungry.
The other thing I`d say is to focus on foods that maximum flavour yet are low calorie (which means v. low carbs). Pickles work: pickled eggs, pickled jalapenos, sauerkraut (a gift for slimmers, that). Also, tomatoes, tuna (in water only), onions. You can feast on that stuff at very low calories.
Whey protein shakes stave off the hunger too and are delicious if you pick the right one and are also looking for a muscle-building hit. Building muscle aids fat loss as it keeps your metabolism high even on days you don`t work out.
If we protect the vulnerable via vaccination, and for the remainder COVID is essentially harmless (if sometimes unpleasant) why do case rates matter?
Whitty said he was concerned about case rates in the 20/30-year olds. Why? number of deaths in that cohort is virtually zero, right? and if they pass it on to grandad, well grandad's been vaccinated.
This forum used to be all about politics - now it seems to be a home for narcissistic weight watchers.
Anyway, the case and death numbers are sobering for a Friday evening (whether you've given up on alcohol or not) and while some MP who has obviously too much time on his hands tweets about anything and everything, the fact remains we are still in the middle of a serious public health crisis.
I see the American conservatives (or Sore Losers Anonymous) are already laying into Biden because of some glib remark at a press conference. The likes of Sean Hannity have decided to be on the barricades of opposition from minute one - well, fair enough, it's politics.
The PMI numbers were also sobering (put down the home made booze in the cheap seats). At 38.8, the flash number for Services was poor but well off the historic lows of last spring. I imagine companies are finding ways round the lockdown restrictions which aren't of course as stringent as in the spring. Manufacturing came in at 52.9, still down on December but not perhaps as bad as feared.
These numbers will all bounce dramatically when cosseted home workers like me (apparently) can go out and spend all the cash we've been piling up over the past 10 months. The borrowing figures make even sobering reading and resolving the deficit is going to be a big challenge for Sunak who faces having to do things which will make him unpopular which is the curse of the Chancellor.
No one thanks you when things are going well but put up taxes and you become Public Enemy No.1 overnight which is why the Prime Minister has you close when it's going well and at a distance when it's not.
He will surely raise much more this year with a mayoral campaign where he can claim to be the bookies second favourite.
A few hundred K investment makes a lot of sense for him.
I wonder if he knows enough about the exchange to do this through a premium charge account, where he could get a 40% discount!
Case rates are meaningless after vaccination, surely?
No more over promising is wise
OTOH, I correctly predicted well in advance the rapid descent into chaos and the new lockdown in early January, for example (in fact I nominated the 8th as House Arrest Day and it happened on the 4th, so on that occasion I was slightly overoptimistic!)
What I always say when I come over all miserablist about things keeping on going pear-shaped, and the prospect of the whole catastrophe dragging on and on interminably, is that I hope - sincerely - that my pessimism isn't borne out. It's just that sometimes, it is. That's all.
On this site you see that with some on the left like Nick Palmer who happily supported Blair through to Corbyn and now Starmer.
So many of those who say they support Trump really mean they support the GOP nominee whoever that is. That for them can transfer to supporting Sasse rather than Inis.
The actual hardcore Trumpists will be a tiny fraction of GOP voters and will only be truly visible by seeing who remains a hardcore Trumpist even after the GOP have moved on.
On here there were many Corbyn supporters last year. Now I can only think of bigjohnowls who is left carrying the torch for him. The party has moved on as will the GOP.
There are principles that can back your position but when all you can share is untruths like this then it just seems you fail to grasp the gravity of the situation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994
https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1327
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-lungs-scarring-smokers-lungs/
Almost 30% of all hospitalised cases readmitted
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/almost-30-of-covid-patients-in-england-re-admitted-to-hospital-after-discharge-study
"essentially harmless"
Given that completion of Phase One could take us up to some point in May or possibly even June, I certainly think there's a non-negligible possibility that most children won't be back into school again until September. If it gets late enough into the academic year then, assuming the Summer holidays take place as normal, the powers that be may well conclude that there's no point in bringing the kids back for about five minutes and simply write the remaining classroom time off.
NEW THREAD
1. Don't drink alcohol for a couple of weeks.
2. Exercise - even if it's only 15 minutes.
3. Avoid carbs in the evening.
Excet, strangely, Laithwaites wine.