The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
Zero Cancer and Zero Heart Disease after that. Leaving us to enjoy 10 years of dementia before our brains give up the ghost and forget how to breathe....
Something has to get us. Hopefully at the end of a long and productive life and death in our sleep. But it does look like some are chasing immortality.
Zero cancer and zero heart disease would be great actually - but neither is a disease brought on directly by social contact. Zero dementia would be good too. The human body will naturally reach the end of the road and expire - some say around 120.
There are people working on fixes for all of that.... bone density, muscle loss etc etc
Is the Scottish Government actually trying to get the Streisand Effect renamed the Sturgeon Effect ?
All this is doing is giving still greater publicity to Salmond's allegations.
Surely, the smart thing would have been to let Salmond make his allegations weeks ago, at the height of the pandemic when no-one was really interested.
Does the Scottish Government understand Moore's Law ? ..... (Jo Moore, of course, not Gordon Moore).
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If the Good Friday agreement is important and you don't want any problems at the Glasgow Summit - the politically sensitive approach would be to visit London and return via Dublin.
I really don't get the idea that you would go there first, it just adds a risk for zero benefit.
There's zero love for Boris Johnson in the Biden administration because of the PM's comments about Obama's Kenyan heritage which was less of a dog whistle and more of a foghorn to American ears.
Respect the office, not the holder of the post.
Something which Boris Johnson failed to do so spectacularly, actions have consequences.
I mean this is Obama's former Deputy National Security Adviser and someone Biden listened to a lot for his foreign policy staffing.
So you've been parroting for the past four months, repeatedly harking back to the same old Obama-era grudges.
Meanwhile the real world moves on and leaves you behind. Biden called Boris first, the two have been working together for months now on surely the 3 "big C" international issues: Covid, Climate and China.
The idea he's going to dump that for some tabloid trash from years ago is pathetic. Biden is not pathetic.
About China, hold that thought.
Boris Johnson says he is 'fervently Sinophile,' seeks to improve China-UK economic ties.
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
On excess mortality - quite a strange thing from Euromomo showing very little excess mortality in Wales and a lot more in England. Wondering why that would be - seems to contradict all the other data showing Wales has been badly hit by COVID.
Wales did badly following their circuit breaker, but deaths have fallen steadily since then.
England had a lot of cases in December and early January, leading to lots of deaths in January and early February. The hugeness of the spike is a distinctly English phenomenon.
OK, some of that is bad luck of having Kent Covid develop in... Kent, I guess. But it was first identified in late September. It was obvious towards the end of the November lockdown that something bad was going on (cases in the SE were failing to fall in the way they should have done and were elsewhere). And yet London started December in Tier 2, and Christmas was on until a few days before Christmas, and far too many schools remained open for far too long, and then there was the Twixtmas gap before we went back into lockdown. I think that was distinctively English.
With hindsight, that was all calamitous. Question is- was it calamitous with reasonable foresight? Personally, I think it was. You're in a pandemic. You've had recent experience of exponential growth and the value of applying restrictions quickly so you can get a handle on what's going on. To faff the way England did between early December and early January was bad government.
I accept that mileages vary on this.
Thanks - I agree it was calamitous with reasonable foresight. The second wave has really been a disaster in the UK.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
"One way of doing this would be repurposing unused spaces to create “Nightingale” schools where children are able to learn in a safe and socially distant way, reducing crowding in existing classrooms, and calling on former teachers who have left the profession to help. In addition, we could use blended learning, combining classroom and at-home education to reduce the amount of social mixing in schools. This would require ensuring that everyone has internet connectivity and laptops or tablets."
The Crown Office has clearly decided it is now the Sturgeon Protection Service.
Last night Sturgeon said to Salmond "show the evidence!", today the Crown Office took it down.....Since it had been lawyered to within an inch of it's life - it will be interesting to see what is "problematic".....
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Quite right too, care home residents will unfortunately be amongst those who are least likely to respond to vaccination by virtue of having weaker immune systems. All staff must be vaccinated.
Agree. More generally, we are in a national emergency that has blighted lives of everyone for over a year. The vaccine is the only hope of a route back to normality. The workplace is probably the most significant vector of transmission of all.
So at a minimum the government should legislate to: 1. Require employers to change contracts of employment to require their employees to be vaccinated, or otherwise resign, in any specifically defined workplace environment where Covid outbreaks are likely to lead to relatively high levels of deaths and hospital admissions (e.g. care homes, hospitals.) 2. In any contract of employment in all settings, end the risk to employers to stop changes to contracts to require vaccination potentially opening up claims of breach of contract/constructive dismissal by refusniks. 3. Place a duty on all employers to conduct an assessment of the risk of transmission within or between their workforce, and to require vaccination of employees as a condition of employment unless that assessment showed that risks could be adequately minimised by control measures, and to explicitly place a liability on employers for damages arising any Covid outbreak that could be shown to have arisen from failure of such documented control measures. 4. Extend the above to agency staff as well as directly employed staff.
Result: Pretty well all employers move to require vaccination to avoid breaking the law or the risk of being sued.
All broadly sensible but you are going to need to make an exception for women of child-bearing age, many of whom work in care homes and hospitals. AIUI the vaccine is not recommended for those trying to get pregnant. So making it a condition of employment that such women must have one is not on.
You also - if you are going to force people to have a medicine - need to have no fault compensation paid for by the state for anyone harmed by this, as is the case for other vaccinations I believe.
Of course there need to be named exceptions, but in specific circumstances rather than just for the whim of the employee.
Technically, you are not forcing people to have a vaccination, but rather forcing people of working age to make a choice between having a vaccination or significantly restricting their employment options.
Of course. Named exceptions for bona fide medical reasons. There is a precedent with the Hepatitis B vaccine I believe for medical staff.
It would be good if the whole vaccination programme could be used to defeat the harm caused by Wakefield and the anti-vaxxers.
Society is painfully relearning a lesson that the older people in our society understood rather better: hygiene, fresh air and vaccinations are worthwhile, particularly the last. Those who have any sort of memory of what life was like pre-mass vaccinations and the harm that narcissistic, selfish and stupid anti-vaxxers do should be shouting this message loud and clear.
This time last year Daughter got mumps. She had the MMR as a child. But there was an outbreak of mumps in the North West and tests were done etc. Vaccination rates had fallen with predictable results. It all got forgotten as Covid came along. But she was quite ill for ca. 3 weeks and then developed a form of meningitis which can be a side effect of adult mumps.
I could quite easily do serious physical harm to anti-vaxxers without any guilt whatsoever. Just as well I've been locked up for the past year.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
After a simply gloriously sunny day yesterday, rain and wind here today. A reminder that spring weather is unreliable and often far too cold to be outside for any prolonged period, especially in the evening, and in most of the country.
Very few beer gardens are going to open on the earliest possible date because it is hard to do so profitably during a month when in large parts of the country the weather is often poor and unreliable, which makes planning and ordering stock difficult. Remember also that if you have a tent with sides in the garden it cannot be used as it is classed as "inside space". If it open at the sides then who is going to want to sit in there in the evening open to the elements in April in many parts of the country?
What would be more useful is allowing takeaway alcohol sales for, gasp, pubs which have been prohibited from doing so, even though off licences and supermarkets have been allowed to.
Also important in the general rejoicing is to know what is to happen to the support offered to hospitality because currently it is to stop well before venues are allowed to open properly.
More than a week's notice is needed for opening. Breweries have already said that they will need 2-3 weeks notice to start operations so don't be surprised to find many places not opening until the end of May/ early June. From mid-February until then is a way to go without income and with support significantly less than fixed costs.
But at least there is a plan and the recognition that zero-Covid is unachievable is a welcome dose of realism.
Best of luck to your daughter, after what’s clearly been a terrible time. Let’s hope and pray for a long summer of good weather and domestic holidays.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
If so what happens?
I'm not sure it is possible to be in contempt of Hoyrood. It's possible but I am aware of no provision for it.
- an EU that has cozied up to China - an EU that has cozied up to Russia - an EU that has put a hard border across the island of Ireland, however "mistakenly"
- a UK that has applied to join the CP-TPP to broaden its world trade base - a UK that has taken a firm stand against China in IT and security - a UK that has taken the vaccine rollout very seriously in battling Covid
Where do you think the Biden administration thinks its friends currently reside?
The thesis that Biden will waste his time feuding with the UK relies on the rather demeaning assumption that he is even more of a petulant man-child than his predecessor. I don't think he is at all, so I suspect the papers will be full of quotes about the 'surprisingly warm' nature of his first face-to-face meeting with Boris when it happens.
I think Biden is complex.
He's gone full Woke (probably he doesn't really understand it at heart, but knows it's important to the next generation in the Dem base - so he does it) is attached to Ireland, and is obviously an enthusiastic internationalist, but he also backed Britain unequivocally in the Falklands War, and he likes trains and is proud of it.
I think that means he'll back those who support his foreign policy objectives. I don't think he'll do bitterness and vengeance because you don't survive that long in building a career through bipartisanship in Congress with that approach.
He's also known Bibi for decades, and has supported Israel for the same, and he finally called him a week ago so I think that "snub" was probably overblown, although there was clearly a gentle message there.
It's so good not to have a maniac as President of the USA.
Yes. As I'd hoped and expected my world is materially better with Donald Trump not in it. I'd liken it to the absence of piles.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
I do not think that the country would have accepted a faster unlocking scenario. Much as I hate to admit it the measures outlined were a masterpiece of triangulation.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
If so what happens?
I'm not sure it is possible to be in contempt of Hoyrood. It's possible but I am aware of no provision for it.
Pass it into law, quick. I want to see what happens...
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
Zero Cancer and Zero Heart Disease after that. Leaving us to enjoy 10 years of dementia before our brains give up the ghost and forget how to breathe....
Something has to get us. Hopefully at the end of a long and productive life and death in our sleep. But it does look like some are chasing immortality.
Zero cancer and zero heart disease would be great actually - but neither is a disease brought on directly by social contact. Zero dementia would be good too. The human body will naturally reach the end of the road and expire - some say around 120.
Perfect. I said to someone earlier that I've been a Labour member for 50 years. Was tempted to add "And plan on remaining one for another 50 years...or die trying". I'll be 120 in 49 years, I think that would be a reasonable shot.
Yes, it's becoming a bit of a parody in all honesty.
It does question the extent of devolution. I think that the UK government should, in exceptional circumstances, be able to declare a national emergency and for the specific aim of dealing with that emergency temporarily take back powers that would otherwise be devolved.
It’s been the same in the US, with the various State governors and city mayors competing with each other to be different, and the announcements seemingly more playing politics (see, we are keeping our pubs open!) than actually dealing with the pandemic.
The Crown Office has clearly decided it is now the Sturgeon Protection Service.
We have to remember that this evidence has already been published - several times. It is public. If there were any danger of identifying the complainants, we would be past that point. This has NOTHING to do with publication, EVERYTHING to do with whitewashing this enquiry report. How Sturgeon has the audacity to demand Salmond back his claims with evidence, and then have her rottweilers censor the same evidence, is breathtaking.
The Salmond/Sturgeon psychodrama is really confusing for those of us who haven't been following it much until now.
But the Scottish Crown Office seem to be acting entirely improperly to me on first glace.
Responding to allegations of impropriety in the Crown Office by the Crown Office turning around and saying "you're not allowed to make these allegations" is the sort of twisted behaviour I'd expect from China or Iran, not Scotland.
Is anyone here defending the Crown Office actions? Or is it entirely inappropriate?
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
Zero Cancer and Zero Heart Disease after that. Leaving us to enjoy 10 years of dementia before our brains give up the ghost and forget how to breathe....
Something has to get us. Hopefully at the end of a long and productive life and death in our sleep. But it does look like some are chasing immortality.
Zero cancer and zero heart disease would be great actually - but neither is a disease brought on directly by social contact. Zero dementia would be good too. The human body will naturally reach the end of the road and expire - some say around 120.
There are people working on fixes for all of that.... bone density, muscle loss etc etc
It would appear that they're working on it from the wrong angle though. The point is replenishing the bodies resources and not damaging the body - not 'fixing' it.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
I do not think that the country would have accepted a faster unlocking scenario. Much as I hate to admit it the measures outlined were a masterpiece of triangulation.
It certainly has that feel. I would prefer a bit faster but I can live with this.
Sadly, there are plenty of people who are really, really struggling, so living with this for a bit longer is very hard for them.
After a simply gloriously sunny day yesterday, rain and wind here today. A reminder that spring weather is unreliable and often far too cold to be outside for any prolonged period, especially in the evening, and in most of the country.
Very few beer gardens are going to open on the earliest possible date because it is hard to do so profitably during a month when in large parts of the country the weather is often poor and unreliable, which makes planning and ordering stock difficult. Remember also that if you have a tent with sides in the garden it cannot be used as it is classed as "inside space". If it open at the sides then who is going to want to sit in there in the evening open to the elements in April in many parts of the country?
What would be more useful is allowing takeaway alcohol sales for, gasp, pubs which have been prohibited from doing so, even though off licences and supermarkets have been allowed to.
Also important in the general rejoicing is to know what is to happen to the support offered to hospitality because currently it is to stop well before venues are allowed to open properly.
More than a week's notice is needed for opening. Breweries have already said that they will need 2-3 weeks notice to start operations so don't be surprised to find many places not opening until the end of May/ early June. From mid-February until then is a way to go without income and with support significantly less than fixed costs.
But at least there is a plan and the recognition that zero-Covid is unachievable is a welcome dose of realism.
Best of luck to your daughter, after what’s clearly been a terrible time. Let’s hope and pray for a long summer of good weather and domestic holidays.
Thank you. I have my fingers firmly crossed.
One of her customers just drove up to drop by a bag of get well goodies for her. Such a lovely thought and thing to do. It really is not going out weather here and having to drive up a muddy mountain lane, get out to open a gate, drive, get out and do it again and then have to do all again on the way home shows real kindness.
Whatever happens I am immensely proud of her. And blessed to have her.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
It's an inaccurate report to start with. "The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
Quite right too, care home residents will unfortunately be amongst those who are least likely to respond to vaccination by virtue of having weaker immune systems. All staff must be vaccinated.
Agree. More generally, we are in a national emergency that has blighted lives of everyone for over a year. The vaccine is the only hope of a route back to normality. The workplace is probably the most significant vector of transmission of all.
So at a minimum the government should legislate to: 1. Require employers to change contracts of employment to require their employees to be vaccinated, or otherwise resign, in any specifically defined workplace environment where Covid outbreaks are likely to lead to relatively high levels of deaths and hospital admissions (e.g. care homes, hospitals.) 2. In any contract of employment in all settings, end the risk to employers to stop changes to contracts to require vaccination potentially opening up claims of breach of contract/constructive dismissal by refusniks. 3. Place a duty on all employers to conduct an assessment of the risk of transmission within or between their workforce, and to require vaccination of employees as a condition of employment unless that assessment showed that risks could be adequately minimised by control measures, and to explicitly place a liability on employers for damages arising any Covid outbreak that could be shown to have arisen from failure of such documented control measures. 4. Extend the above to agency staff as well as directly employed staff.
Result: Pretty well all employers move to require vaccination to avoid breaking the law or the risk of being sued.
All broadly sensible but you are going to need to make an exception for women of child-bearing age, many of whom work in care homes and hospitals. AIUI the vaccine is not recommended for those trying to get pregnant. So making it a condition of employment that such women must have one is not on.
You also - if you are going to force people to have a medicine - need to have no fault compensation paid for by the state for anyone harmed by this, as is the case for other vaccinations I believe.
There will inevitably be those who don't get vaccinated for reasons both rational and irrational. But I'm not sure how much this matters so long as the % population protected either by prior infection or vaccine is sufficient to squash community transmission. The primary objective of the vaccine rollout is macro not micro.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
Zero Cancer and Zero Heart Disease after that. Leaving us to enjoy 10 years of dementia before our brains give up the ghost and forget how to breathe....
Something has to get us. Hopefully at the end of a long and productive life and death in our sleep. But it does look like some are chasing immortality.
Zero cancer and zero heart disease would be great actually - but neither is a disease brought on directly by social contact. Zero dementia would be good too. The human body will naturally reach the end of the road and expire - some say around 120.
Perfect. I said to someone earlier that I've been a Labour member for 50 years. Was tempted to add "And plan on remaining one for another 50 years...or die trying". I'll be 120 in 49 years, I think that would be a reasonable shot.
We'll have to find a way of fixing Telemeres to stop cell division failing. Each division doesn't copy your whole DNA strand so some gets lost each time. The Telemere is effectively zero padding for each strand so that this doesn't matter until such time as it runs out.
A correction, though. Some cancers are definitely caused by social contact, because the cancer risk is linked to viruses. HPV for one. There are likely others.
For Biden this trip is surely about making good some of the damage that Trump did to the international standing of the US and its relations with its friends and allies. Biden is coming here because we are chair of the G7 and coordinating the agenda. He will want to make sure that that agenda facilitates his aims. A snub to the chair doesn't look the best way to do that.
Biden has an experienced international team and their agenda is going to be the tensions with China, the chaos of Iran after Trump withdrew and pressing the EU (and Germany in particular) to think again about the gas pipeline from Russia. He may also want to discuss our intentions in relation to the TPP as I think he is considering rejoining. I think that he will want to work with the UK on all of these issues and will want to butter us up a bit after the rudeness of Trump.
I am not betting in this market but if I were I think the UK is a good bet.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
In the winter of 1999/2000 there were 50000 excess deaths due to flu, and no one batted an eyelid
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
"One way of doing this would be repurposing unused spaces to create “Nightingale” schools where children are able to learn in a safe and socially distant way, reducing crowding in existing classrooms, and calling on former teachers who have left the profession to help. In addition, we could use blended learning, combining classroom and at-home education to reduce the amount of social mixing in schools. This would require ensuring that everyone has internet connectivity and laptops or tablets."
Sounds like something out of Black Mirror.
I'm starting to wonder whether these people are actually insane, or whether they just take professional arse-covering to an extreme degree. Nobody who has school-age children could possibly write the above paragraph and believe in it.
Quite right too, care home residents will unfortunately be amongst those who are least likely to respond to vaccination by virtue of having weaker immune systems. All staff must be vaccinated.
Agree. More generally, we are in a national emergency that has blighted lives of everyone for over a year. The vaccine is the only hope of a route back to normality. The workplace is probably the most significant vector of transmission of all.
So at a minimum the government should legislate to: 1. Require employers to change contracts of employment to require their employees to be vaccinated, or otherwise resign, in any specifically defined workplace environment where Covid outbreaks are likely to lead to relatively high levels of deaths and hospital admissions (e.g. care homes, hospitals.) 2. In any contract of employment in all settings, end the risk to employers to stop changes to contracts to require vaccination potentially opening up claims of breach of contract/constructive dismissal by refusniks. 3. Place a duty on all employers to conduct an assessment of the risk of transmission within or between their workforce, and to require vaccination of employees as a condition of employment unless that assessment showed that risks could be adequately minimised by control measures, and to explicitly place a liability on employers for damages arising any Covid outbreak that could be shown to have arisen from failure of such documented control measures. 4. Extend the above to agency staff as well as directly employed staff.
Result: Pretty well all employers move to require vaccination to avoid breaking the law or the risk of being sued.
All broadly sensible but you are going to need to make an exception for women of child-bearing age, many of whom work in care homes and hospitals. AIUI the vaccine is not recommended for those trying to get pregnant. So making it a condition of employment that such women must have one is not on.
You also - if you are going to force people to have a medicine - need to have no fault compensation paid for by the state for anyone harmed by this, as is the case for other vaccinations I believe.
There will inevitably be those who don't get vaccinated for reasons both rational and irrational. But I'm not sure how much this matters so long as the % population protected either by prior infection or vaccine is sufficient to squash community transmission? The primary objective of the vaccine rollout is macro not micro.
It is mainly a macro concern yes, but specifically a micro concern within health and social care settings due to the fact patients/residents may well have weaker immune systems even vaccinated. Which is why I expect it to be made mandatory in time for health and social care workers.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
It's an inaccurate report to start with. "The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
Thank you Andy. I heard that 0.5 figure in passing this morning and wondered where the hell it had come from and what the context was.
BBC radio 4 news trying to shift the blame for not having a vaccine from the people themselves whove made the decision to elsewhere. Poor areas vs rich areas, etc.
It's going to be very interesting to compare this with the redacted version when it is published, and see exactly what (or who) the Crown Office doesn't want us to know.
On excess mortality - quite a strange thing from Euromomo showing very little excess mortality in Wales and a lot more in England. Wondering why that would be - seems to contradict all the other data showing Wales has been badly hit by COVID.
Isn't z-score (that's the only country breadkdown I can see, apologies if I've missed a country excess death measure) dependent on standard deviation (number of standard deviations?). If so, Wales, being a smaller country may have a relatively larger standard deviation (smaller 'sample' so more natural variability, so any given increase could have a smaller z-score compared to the larger country - England - 'sample' with a relatively smaller standard deviation)
Yes, z-score is a complete nonsense for measuring excess deaths during a pandemic. It's only useful when scanning for unanticipated signals (so that they are above background noise).
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
In the winter of 1999/2000 there were 50000 excess deaths due to flu, and no one batted an eyelid
Was there a widespread flu vaccine program around then ?
It's going to be very interesting to compare this with the redacted version when it is published, and see exactly what (or who) the Crown Office doesn't want us to know.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
Depends on your definition of "kill".
I thought a number of very elderly people could develop pneumonia and die from as little as a common cold?
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
Depends on your definition of "kill".
The same definition as the way that Covid-19 mainly kills elderly people.
Indeed. But nobody in power seems to listen to Mina, or ask advice of experts in (broadly) detection. I've been trying to resist venting my frustration here. Sadly I think it comes down to the very weak teaching of statistics to medical professionals (and indeed most scientists).
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
I dont think unemployment will be an issue is the coming year, I think the complete opposite will be true, It is certainly happening now in the M & E field. Its very difficult to get staff.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
It's an inaccurate report to start with. "The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
Why would the scientists even bother to run a simulation assuming 'no immunity from any sources' when in the real world we have a plethora of vaccines coming on stream?
Is it so the headline would be picked up by some brainless journalist with an agenda?
It's going to be very interesting to compare this with the redacted version when it is published, and see exactly what (or who) the Crown Office doesn't want us to know.
Let’s hope it’s as good as the EU’s redaction of the AstraZenica vaccine contract, where they redacted the bit that said the EU would have no legal recourse for delayed shipments, which were to be on a ‘best effort’ basis. While screaming to anyone who’d listen about the shipments being delayed.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
I dont think unemployment will be an issue is the coming year, I think the complete opposite will be true, It is certainly happening now in the M & E field. Its very difficult to get staff.
Are you willing to take on people with no experience and train them?
On excess mortality - quite a strange thing from Euromomo showing very little excess mortality in Wales and a lot more in England. Wondering why that would be - seems to contradict all the other data showing Wales has been badly hit by COVID.
Wales did badly following their circuit breaker, but deaths have fallen steadily since then.
England had a lot of cases in December and early January, leading to lots of deaths in January and early February. The hugeness of the spike is a distinctly English phenomenon.
OK, some of that is bad luck of having Kent Covid develop in... Kent, I guess. But it was first identified in late September. It was obvious towards the end of the November lockdown that something bad was going on (cases in the SE were failing to fall in the way they should have done and were elsewhere). And yet London started December in Tier 2, and Christmas was on until a few days before Christmas, and far too many schools remained open for far too long, and then there was the Twixtmas gap before we went back into lockdown. I think that was distinctively English.
With hindsight, that was all calamitous. Question is- was it calamitous with reasonable foresight? Personally, I think it was. You're in a pandemic. You've had recent experience of exponential growth and the value of applying restrictions quickly so you can get a handle on what's going on. To faff the way England did between early December and early January was bad government.
I accept that mileages vary on this.
Thanks - I agree it was calamitous with reasonable foresight. The second wave has really been a disaster in the UK.
Always remember though that locking down is not cost free. And is surprisingly ineffective in stopping the spread. The - understandable - instinct is always to say 'we should do something' or 'we should have done more'. But sometimes the treatment is worse than the disease. And also always remember that lockdown can only work with broad consent. Lockdown at Christmas would have been bitterly fought against.
I am personally pathetically grateful, for my own mental health and that of my family, to have had even the small Christmas that we were allowed.
The incumbent mayor has been bailed in December. So he obviously won't stand again this May.
Around 10 people applied for selection. 3 local Cllrs were shortlisted. One (mainstream in terms of national internal politics) who was Deputy Mayor (and is now acting Mayor). One left-wing. One who opposed internally the previous mayor and would like to abolish the directly elected mayor position.
Last week ballot papers were due to be delivered. However, the day before, the selection was halted. Candidates were called for a re-interview last Friday, with ballots to be distributed starting from this Monday 22th.
Today, the selection has been stopped again. Applications are re-opened. The 3 previously shortlisted candidates are not invited to reapply again!
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
It's an inaccurate report to start with. "The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
Why would the scientists even bother to run a simulation assuming 'no immunity from any sources' when in the real world we have a plethora of vaccines coming on stream?
Is it so the headline would be picked up by some brainless journalist with an agenda?
No.
Its because you set the baseline as to what happens without immunity, then you build immunity into the model. Which they did. That way as immunity levels change you can update the model depending upon that factor, since immunity isn't fixed.
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
If so what happens?
I'm not sure it is possible to be in contempt of Hoyrood. It's possible but I am aware of no provision for it.
Is that the first time an EU country has beaten us? Edit, 2 of them in fact. This has been a major slow down.
It is also noticeable though that EU still not really speeding up at much. Its glacial progress in terms of ramping up e.g. Germany still only avergaing 130k a day vs 100k a month ago.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
Depends on your definition of "kill".
I thought a number of very elderly people could develop pneumonia and die from as little as a common cold?
Well yes. But virtually no one in good health dies of a cold these days. It may be the final straw, but it will only ever be a contributory factor on top of other factors.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Well, it is pretty obvious there are divisions within SAGE, which is probably as it should be. I would say Michie is a long way apart from, say, Robert Dingwall.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
It's an inaccurate report to start with. "The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
Why would the scientists even bother to run a simulation assuming 'no immunity from any sources' when in the real world we have a plethora of vaccines coming on stream?
Is it so the headline would be picked up by some brainless journalist with an agenda?
They didn't. They were showing their working.
Start with R at this point and adjust it up or down based on the extrapolated effects of NPIs. Then reduce it by the estimated reduction due to immunity (starting at 32% as of now and increasing*) to get the effective R value for the scenario in question.
They annotate it every time to ensure it's clear.
*It's in the first paragraph right at the start of the paper: "Current levels of transmissibility are based on our latest estimates for England at R_eff (including immunity) =0.75 (translating to R_excl_immunity =1.10 with an estimated 32% of the population currently protected via prior infection- and/or vaccine-induced immunity)."
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
That matches with the story about the population of London declining by 700k. A majority of whom will have been foreign labour working in F&B, entertainment and service sectors, who have voluntarily deported themselves after losing jobs.
The GDP per capita figure is going to be the one to watch in the recovery phase, assuming we can get accurate estimates of the denominator in something approaching real time.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
The common cold probably does kill a lot of very elderly people.
Depends on your definition of "kill".
The same definition as the way that Covid-19 mainly kills elderly people.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
It will be very interesting indeed when all the global data gets crunched and we get a more precise idea of why exactly some areas did better or worse with the same or different measures. There'll be a vast array of factors to consider: restrictions, compliance, demographics, politics, geography, culture, economics, health systems, reporting standards, you name it. But that research hasn't been done yet - just juxtaposing the numbers from Florida and California is barely step 1 of the above process - and until it has, it's reasonable to assume from the preponderance of data available now that lockdowns reduce transmission in the same way that condoms help prevent pregnancies and umbrellas keep you from getting wet in the rain.
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
If so what happens?
I'm not sure it is possible to be in contempt of Hoyrood. It's possible but I am aware of no provision for it.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
It will be very interesting indeed when all the global data gets crunched and we get a more precise idea of why exactly some areas did better or worse with the same or different measures. There'll be a vast array of factors to consider: restrictions, compliance, demographics, politics, geography, culture, economics, health systems, reporting standards, you name it. But that research hasn't been done yet - just juxtaposing the numbers from Florida and California is barely step 1 of the above process - and until it has, it's reasonable to assume from the preponderance of data available now that lockdowns reduce transmission in the same way that condoms help prevent pregnancies and umbrellas keep you from getting wet in the rain.
He probably thinks that umbrellas *cause* rain, because it rains when people carry them. After all, has anyone done a double-blind randomized trial of whether umbrellas keep you dry?
Personally, I think it's a conspiracy by evil scientists who want to force everyone to carry umbrellas, because they enjoy exercising that sort of power.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
It will be very interesting indeed when all the global data gets crunched and we get a more precise idea of why exactly some areas did better or worse with the same or different measures. There'll be a vast array of factors to consider: restrictions, compliance, demographics, politics, geography, culture, economics, health systems, reporting standards, you name it. But that research hasn't been done yet - just juxtaposing the numbers from Florida and California is barely step 1 of the above process - and until it has, it's reasonable to assume from the preponderance of data available now that lockdowns reduce transmission in the same way that condoms help prevent pregnancies and umbrellas keep you from getting wet in the rain.
You know you can see the exact dates, with a lag, of the November lockdown in the cases and hospitalisation datasets? Try explaining that if lockdowns don't work. Unfortunately the death data is way too noisy by day of the week to be able to eyeball it in the raw data but you can definitely see the pause in the increase in the second wave.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
Its almost as if freedom of movement and competition for work from the EU had been restricting the opportunities of British people to get jobs in our economy. Obviously that can't be true, I have read the opposite so many times on here.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
It will be very interesting indeed when all the global data gets crunched and we get a more precise idea of why exactly some areas did better or worse with the same or different measures. There'll be a vast array of factors to consider: restrictions, compliance, demographics, politics, geography, culture, economics, health systems, reporting standards, you name it. But that research hasn't been done yet - just juxtaposing the numbers from Florida and California is barely step 1 of the above process - and until it has, it's reasonable to assume from the preponderance of data available now that lockdowns reduce transmission in the same way that condoms help prevent pregnancies and umbrellas keep you from getting wet in the rain.
I am sure you will clutch at any straw in your desperation to cover up the biggest peacetime policy error by any government since appeasement.
Its still the biggest policy error since appeasment. And I intend to make the fake tories that propounded it wear it like an albatross.
Made me chuckle....while ranting about why isn't Starmer standing up, why aren't the normal people standing up to this corrupt evil government, they show a clip of what I presume he wants it to be for "us" to be getting together and demanding change...by showing a clip of wokerity people no appaulding, rather doing the jazz hands, the sort of people who have a badge with their pronouns on like It, Z and They...I can't see Stoke man having much in common with those type of people and there in lies the problem for the Corbynista rip it all up and start again.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
That matches with the story about the population of London declining by 700k. A majority of whom will have been foreign labour working in F&B, entertainment and service sectors, who have voluntarily deported themselves after losing jobs.
The GDP per capita figure is going to be the one to watch in the recovery phase, assuming we can get accurate estimates of the denominator in something approaching real time.
It just so happens that 21 March is Census Day.
On the subject of which, it would be interesting to know how the ONS are doing their coverage survey (assuming it's being done like last time). Basically, they have an independent unit to sample 1% of postcodes by knocking on doors and collecting the information the old fashioned way. Then you can work out how many people were missed by the real thing. I guess they might have special dispensation to do their work.
"we should establish “green zones” – areas where the virus has been judged to be under control, where there is no danger of infection and thus no need for restrictions."
"The overarching aim should be maintaining minimal cases of Covid-19 (a level of about 10 new cases per 100,000 people a week, for example, might be judged low enough)."
If you listen to the fanbois on here, scientists don't want lockdown to go on a minute longer than necessary. Not a minute.
Yeah right.....
Absolutely right.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
Wow what a concession. Thanks Chris!
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
But of course. Why on Earth would anyone expect that lockdown - a strategy of reducing person-to-person contact - would have any effect at all on a disease spread by person-to-person contact?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
That might work in your brain, but unfortunately it does not work in practice. Not in the way you think. Demonstrably. California locked down hard. Florida didn't. Same sort of climate. Result? not much difference. The link is not there in the 'turn down the covid, dear' way you think it is.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
It will be very interesting indeed when all the global data gets crunched and we get a more precise idea of why exactly some areas did better or worse with the same or different measures. There'll be a vast array of factors to consider: restrictions, compliance, demographics, politics, geography, culture, economics, health systems, reporting standards, you name it. But that research hasn't been done yet - just juxtaposing the numbers from Florida and California is barely step 1 of the above process - and until it has, it's reasonable to assume from the preponderance of data available now that lockdowns reduce transmission in the same way that condoms help prevent pregnancies and umbrellas keep you from getting wet in the rain.
People are very keen to compare the UK's performance (good and bad) with other countries where all those factors differ also. Between two states in the US is not an outrageous comparison, therefore.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
Its almost as if freedom of movement and competition for work from the EU had been restricting the opportunities of British people to get jobs in our economy. Obviously that can't be true, I have read the opposite so many times on here.
Can anyone explain UK born +251k during a pandemic?
That doesn't make any intuitive sense to me. Not all of the country is like London, up here hospitality is typically staffed by UK born not migrant staff.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
In the winter of 1999/2000 there were 50000 excess deaths due to flu, and no one batted an eyelid
But no excess deaths due to smallpox, yet no-one pilloried the Zero Smallpox advocates.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
In the winter of 1999/2000 there were 50000 excess deaths due to flu, and no one batted an eyelid
But no excess deaths due to smallpox, yet no-one pilloried the Zero Smallpox advocates.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
Its almost as if freedom of movement and competition for work from the EU had been restricting the opportunities of British people to get jobs in our economy. Obviously that can't be true, I have read the opposite so many times on here.
Or could be that the benefits cap is now removed if you earn more than £605 per month.
The deep flaw in the Zero-Covidians' thinking is that if Zero Covid is the right policy, then so is Zero Influenza and Zero Pneumonia. Hell, why stop there? Zero Common Cold also sounds brilliant.
They need to be held to account on this, rather than the media wheeling them out uncritically.
People don't generally die from the Common Code (why was it even necessary to say that?) And yes, Zero Pneumonia is a good policy.
No it isn't, its a stupid soundbite since it isn't achievable. If we were to lockdown until we sustainably achieved Zero Pneumonia it would be devastating not a good policy.
In order for a policy to be good it has to be achievable. If it isn't achievable, its not SMART.
Calling the medical experts...
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
9,000 a year from flu said Whitty last night iirc. And a lot more he added in a bad year.
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
The Gov't manages flu with a vaccination program for over 50s and also lots of under 50s through occupational offers. It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
In the winter of 1999/2000 there were 50000 excess deaths due to flu, and no one batted an eyelid
But no excess deaths due to smallpox, yet no-one pilloried the Zero Smallpox advocates.
Nobody was locking down to avoid smallpox. Only vaccinating.
Also, the zero smallpox plan started in 1800 and only delivered recently.
Quite right too, care home residents will unfortunately be amongst those who are least likely to respond to vaccination by virtue of having weaker immune systems. All staff must be vaccinated.
Agree. More generally, we are in a national emergency that has blighted lives of everyone for over a year. The vaccine is the only hope of a route back to normality. The workplace is probably the most significant vector of transmission of all.
So at a minimum the government should legislate to: 1. Require employers to change contracts of employment to require their employees to be vaccinated, or otherwise resign, in any specifically defined workplace environment where Covid outbreaks are likely to lead to relatively high levels of deaths and hospital admissions (e.g. care homes, hospitals.) 2. In any contract of employment in all settings, end the risk to employers to stop changes to contracts to require vaccination potentially opening up claims of breach of contract/constructive dismissal by refusniks. 3. Place a duty on all employers to conduct an assessment of the risk of transmission within or between their workforce, and to require vaccination of employees as a condition of employment unless that assessment showed that risks could be adequately minimised by control measures, and to explicitly place a liability on employers for damages arising any Covid outbreak that could be shown to have arisen from failure of such documented control measures. 4. Extend the above to agency staff as well as directly employed staff.
Result: Pretty well all employers move to require vaccination to avoid breaking the law or the risk of being sued.
All broadly sensible but you are going to need to make an exception for women of child-bearing age, many of whom work in care homes and hospitals. AIUI the vaccine is not recommended for those trying to get pregnant. So making it a condition of employment that such women must have one is not on.
You also - if you are going to force people to have a medicine - need to have no fault compensation paid for by the state for anyone harmed by this, as is the case for other vaccinations I believe.
There will inevitably be those who don't get vaccinated for reasons both rational and irrational. But I'm not sure how much this matters so long as the % population protected either by prior infection or vaccine is sufficient to squash community transmission? The primary objective of the vaccine rollout is macro not micro.
It is mainly a macro concern yes, but specifically a micro concern within health and social care settings due to the fact patients/residents may well have weaker immune systems even vaccinated. Which is why I expect it to be made mandatory in time for health and social care workers.
I do see a case for that but I'm not sure how much of a slam dunk it is in the event the virus is squashed due to aggregate immunity. You'd have to weight the benefit of the reduced risk of transmission to the vulnerable versus the cost of losing staff in a sector that finds recruitment difficult.
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
Its almost as if freedom of movement and competition for work from the EU had been restricting the opportunities of British people to get jobs in our economy. Obviously that can't be true, I have read the opposite so many times on here.
Can anyone explain UK born +251k during a pandemic?
That doesn't make any intuitive sense to me. Not all of the country is like London, up here hospitality is typically staffed by UK born not migrant staff.
The obvious answer is that the immigrants left London in the spring last year, so by the late summer, as the bars and restaurants reopened, they found U.K. staff to fill them.
There will also have been a load of new jobs created in things like delivery and security during the pandemic, in many cases grabbing unemployed Brits before they hit the dole.
There’s a great PhD thesis in a thorough analysis of those figures across sectors.
Made me chuckle....while ranting about why isn't Starmer standing up, why aren't the normal people standing up to this corrupt evil government, they show a clip of what I presume he wants it to be for "us" to be getting together and demanding change...by showing a clip of wokerity people no appaulding, rather doing the jazz hands, the sort of people who have a badge with their pronouns on like It, Z and They...I can't see Stoke man having much in common with those type of people and there in lies the problem for the Corbynista rip it all up and start again.
Comments
It is my understanding that quite a number of people die of the flue each year, despite the vaccines. Also that Long Flu is thing.
All this is doing is giving still greater publicity to Salmond's allegations.
Surely, the smart thing would have been to let Salmond make his allegations weeks ago, at the height of the pandemic when no-one was really interested.
Does the Scottish Government understand Moore's Law ? ..... (Jo Moore, of course, not Gordon Moore).
Good news but vaccine hesitant pregnant women may well read this as Covid safe for pregnant women... Not what this is saying.
Yeah right.....
https://twitter.com/Berlaymonster/status/1364193515949948930?s=20
Would it be possible for a situation to arise where the Court could be in Contempt of Parliament and the Parliament in Contempt of Court, on the same matter?
If so what happens?
The second wave has really been a disaster in the UK.
Sounds like something out of Black Mirror.
Did you here Whitty last night explaining why cases likely would go up again in the future and R would go above one, but that its not concerning with the vaccine and we need to live with it?
Almost as if SAGE are not your SPECTRE madmen who want to control the world and lock us down forever afterall.
It would be good if the whole vaccination programme could be used to defeat the harm caused by Wakefield and the anti-vaxxers.
Society is painfully relearning a lesson that the older people in our society understood rather better: hygiene, fresh air and vaccinations are worthwhile, particularly the last. Those who have any sort of memory of what life was like pre-mass vaccinations and the harm that narcissistic, selfish and stupid anti-vaxxers do should be shouting this message loud and clear.
This time last year Daughter got mumps. She had the MMR as a child. But there was an outbreak of mumps in the North West and tests were done etc. Vaccination rates had fallen with predictable results. It all got forgotten as Covid came along. But she was quite ill for ca. 3 weeks and then developed a form of meningitis which can be a side effect of adult mumps.
I could quite easily do serious physical harm to anti-vaxxers without any guilt whatsoever. Just as well I've been locked up for the past year.
Who has the upper hand is the question.
Lilico has an interesting thread about the various SAGE scenarios:
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1364129171639836672
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/1364190532013076480?s=20
And yet we carry on with our lives and our economy and have for centuries. No one has proposed shutting down life for flu.
Well, until now presumably...
Whitty is only onside because Johnson agreed to a timetable that saved his reputation. Florida and other US states have broken the link between lockdown and covid. There is no thermostat for turning the diseaseup or down beyond seasonality and vaccination. Demonstrably.
Our emergence from lockdown is to maintain the notion that lockdown is such a thermostat as Whitless and Unabalanced have maintained all along .
At a massive cost to Britain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8yW5cyXXRc
It'll be the same with Covid just with a potentially wider group to be vaccinated.
But the Scottish Crown Office seem to be acting entirely improperly to me on first glace.
Responding to allegations of impropriety in the Crown Office by the Crown Office turning around and saying "you're not allowed to make these allegations" is the sort of twisted behaviour I'd expect from China or Iran, not Scotland.
Is anyone here defending the Crown Office actions? Or is it entirely inappropriate?
Well, I'm convinced - it must all have been a secret plot to save Chris Whitty's reputation instead.
Sadly, there are plenty of people who are really, really struggling, so living with this for a bit longer is very hard for them.
One of her customers just drove up to drop by a bag of get well goodies for her. Such a lovely thought and thing to do. It really is not going out weather here and having to drive up a muddy mountain lane, get out to open a gate, drive, get out and do it again and then have to do all again on the way home shows real kindness.
Whatever happens I am immensely proud of her. And blessed to have her.
"The scientists also warned that reopening schools could see the Covid 'R' rate rise by as much as 0.5."
No, they didn't. They said that the R-rate if we had no immunity from any sources would raise by as much as 0.5, but that because we had a mix of vaccine-generated immunity and acquired immunity, they estimated it might rise to around 1.09 from around 0.75.
Which would be why every scenario had schools reopening on the 8th of March.
And, as Lilico says, all bar "drop NPIs before vaccination" had similar deaths and that was explicit in the paper.
Given that the reporter obviously misunderstood some fundamental aspects of the paper, I'd assume the argument is more with the misreport than what the advice actually said.
A correction, though. Some cancers are definitely caused by social contact, because the cancer risk is linked to viruses. HPV for one. There are likely others.
Biden has an experienced international team and their agenda is going to be the tensions with China, the chaos of Iran after Trump withdrew and pressing the EU (and Germany in particular) to think again about the gas pipeline from Russia. He may also want to discuss our intentions in relation to the TPP as I think he is considering rejoining. I think that he will want to work with the UK on all of these issues and will want to butter us up a bit after the rudeness of Trump.
I am not betting in this market but if I were I think the UK is a good bet.
https://www.parliament.scot/HarassmentComplaintsCommittee/General documents/Alex_Salmond_Ministerial_Code.pdf
They removed the link but not the pdf!
Which is why I expect it to be made mandatory in time for health and social care workers.
And I can see why you do not want to admit the truth, because of the implications of the truth are pretty big.
--AS
Total -542k
UK born +251k
EU born -497k
Non EU born -298k
And within the EU born:
EU14 'Western Europe' -58k
EU8 'Eastern Europe' -302k
EU2 'Romania & Bulgaria' -138k
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/employmentbycountryofbirthandnationalityemp06
Helps explain why unemployment hasn't become an issue during the last year.
Edit, 2 of them in fact. This has been a major slow down.
--AS
Is it so the headline would be picked up by some brainless journalist with an agenda?
The - understandable - instinct is always to say 'we should do something' or 'we should have done more'. But sometimes the treatment is worse than the disease.
And also always remember that lockdown can only work with broad consent. Lockdown at Christmas would have been bitterly fought against.
I am personally pathetically grateful, for my own mental health and that of my family, to have had even the small Christmas that we were allowed.
The incumbent mayor has been bailed in December. So he obviously won't stand again this May.
Around 10 people applied for selection. 3 local Cllrs were shortlisted. One (mainstream in terms of national internal politics) who was Deputy Mayor (and is now acting Mayor). One left-wing. One who opposed internally the previous mayor and would like to abolish the directly elected mayor position.
Last week ballot papers were due to be delivered. However, the day before, the selection was halted. Candidates were called for a re-interview last Friday, with ballots to be distributed starting from this Monday 22th.
Today, the selection has been stopped again. Applications are re-opened. The 3 previously shortlisted candidates are not invited to reapply again!
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/applications-liverpool-mayor-candidates-re-19896795
Oh well, one of the flows Corbynite era was also disorganisation. It doesn't seem they have improved too much!
Its because you set the baseline as to what happens without immunity, then you build immunity into the model. Which they did. That way as immunity levels change you can update the model depending upon that factor, since immunity isn't fixed.
But UK born +250k? That _is_ a surprise, at least to me.
They were showing their working.
Start with R at this point and adjust it up or down based on the extrapolated effects of NPIs.
Then reduce it by the estimated reduction due to immunity (starting at 32% as of now and increasing*) to get the effective R value for the scenario in question.
They annotate it every time to ensure it's clear.
*It's in the first paragraph right at the start of the paper: "Current levels of
transmissibility are based on our latest estimates for England at R_eff (including immunity) =0.75
(translating to R_excl_immunity =1.10 with an estimated 32% of the population currently protected via
prior infection- and/or vaccine-induced immunity)."
The GDP per capita figure is going to be the one to watch in the recovery phase, assuming we can get accurate estimates of the denominator in something approaching real time.
Personally, I think it's a conspiracy by evil scientists who want to force everyone to carry umbrellas, because they enjoy exercising that sort of power.
--AS
Its still the biggest policy error since appeasment. And I intend to make the fake tories that propounded it wear it like an albatross.
Made me chuckle....while ranting about why isn't Starmer standing up, why aren't the normal people standing up to this corrupt evil government, they show a clip of what I presume he wants it to be for "us" to be getting together and demanding change...by showing a clip of wokerity people no appaulding, rather doing the jazz hands, the sort of people who have a badge with their pronouns on like It, Z and They...I can't see Stoke man having much in common with those type of people and there in lies the problem for the Corbynista rip it all up and start again.
On the subject of which, it would be interesting to know how the ONS are doing their coverage survey (assuming it's being done like last time). Basically, they have an independent unit to sample 1% of postcodes by knocking on doors and collecting the information the old fashioned way. Then you can work out how many people were missed by the real thing. I guess they might have special dispensation to do their work.
That doesn't make any intuitive sense to me. Not all of the country is like London, up here hospitality is typically staffed by UK born not migrant staff.
This article is from 2015.
“Are we becoming slaves to our smartphones? And are we afraid to admit it?“
https://theplaidzebra.com/are-we-becoming-slaves-to-our-smartphones-and-are-we-afraid-to-admit-it/
Also, the zero smallpox plan started in 1800 and only delivered recently.
https://order-order.com/2021/02/23/redaction-hides-salmonds-accusation-sturgeon-lied-to-parliament/
There will also have been a load of new jobs created in things like delivery and security during the pandemic, in many cases grabbing unemployed Brits before they hit the dole.
There’s a great PhD thesis in a thorough analysis of those figures across sectors.