My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
I believe it is closer to 1 in a 1000. Either way, it is a pretty crushing argument against the insanity prevailing in Paris, Rome and Berlin. AZ is safer than the Pill. No one talks of banning the Pill, yet they ban life saving vaccines in a pandemic. How have democratic governments come to this, in the face of global death on an enormous scale?
The British government made horrific mistakes early on. They are, perhaps, partly excusable from naivety in the face of a novel virus. Still terrible.
THIS is not excusable. There is no justification. Zero. If Boris ever does something this bad he should be sent to live just southwest of Glasgow , in an ex mining town, for the rest of his living days.
That...is a pretty bold statement. And apart from anything else I have no idea what the stats were under previous governments so I have no way of knowing if the disparity between 'reports' and 'charges' has grown.
It has grown, a bit. Though I think it was always a massive discrepancy. And I think the reason it has grown is that there has been much greater encouragement to report rape (and indeed greater keenness to take it to court).
The problem with trying rape is that it is, by its nature, almost always one person's word against another. In a culture where we are innocent until proven guilty, that makes it very hard to make a conviction.
I don't understand how it is one person's word against another. If a person says they did not consent to something I'm not sure that any other person's opinion is relevant.
Because no one ever lies, or changes their mind, or gets drunk and fancies a guy but in the morning thinks they have made a mistake.
Or is unfaithful and then risks losing a boyfriend/husband, so fabricates a rape. That is far from unknown
But it's rare. The problem is mainly the other way. 90% of rapes are not reported. Of the ones that are 97% lead to no charge. And half of them are acquitted. Upshot - For every rape conviction there are approximately 1000 instances which are not punished. It IS effectively decriminalised.
How do we know that 90% of rapes are not reported. Is that anecdotal or has there been surveys?
My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
Dr John Campbell put it well a number of weeks ago in regards to all vaccines. To paraphrase...
When people ask if a drug is absolutely safe / risk free, no, no a drug is absolutely safe, they all have a number of side effects in a small number of people....but overall the reason they are used is the benefits massively outweigh these observed effects.
You only have to look at the pamphlet that comes with anything and it contains a landry list of potential side effects, all of which will have been observed in somebody, hence why they are on there.
My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
A tenuous excuse to share my story! Yesterday I went to boots to pick up my girlfriends prescription for sickness tablets, but the lady at the till gave me her other prescription which is for migraine tablets... so I had to go back and pick up the correct ones. It was the same woman serving so she went “so you’ve got her migraine pills and her sickness pills now... anything else?” Spotted the display behind her and said “oh go on then, I’ll have a couple of packs of viagra while I’m here”... she looked at me as if I was a complete wrongun
That...is a pretty bold statement. And apart from anything else I have no idea what the stats were under previous governments so I have no way of knowing if the disparity between 'reports' and 'charges' has grown.
It has grown, a bit. Though I think it was always a massive discrepancy. And I think the reason it has grown is that there has been much greater encouragement to report rape (and indeed greater keenness to take it to court).
The problem with trying rape is that it is, by its nature, almost always one person's word against another. In a cultu?is re where we are innocent until proven guilty, that makes it very hard to make a conviction.
I don't understand how it is one person's word against another. If a person says they did not consent to something I'm not sure that any other person's opinion is relevant.
? Because they might be lying?
One thing that most people aren't aware of though (if i'm accurately remembering the guidance given by the judge when i was on a rape case jury, and the law may have changed since then) is that it is not sufficient for the victim to have not explicitly granted consent - a defendant can be not guilty under the law if they genuinely believe that has been given (or possibly not denied). In other words, if they say "no" then it's rape. If they are merely unwilling, but the defendant is not aware of this, then it isn't.
Its also worth noting that the law has already been skewed, two people meet in a pub both drunk she can consent to go home and have sex and then claim in the morning it was rape as she was too drunk to consent whereas the guy can't claim to be to drunk to realise she was too drunk to consent
Yes.
It used to be the case that rape law was heavily loaded against the woman. eg rape cases, uniquely, required the jury to be warned by the judge that "alleged victims are known to lie". That misogynist idiocy was rightly done away with, also the absurd idea you "can't rape within a marriage". Get rid of it? Yes. Good.
Other shifts are more controversial. Is it right complainants should have lifelong anonymity, whereas the accused is named from the moment he is charged, and forever allowed to be named, even if acquitted?
That is debatable, I personally believe both should be anonymous until the jury decides on guilt. If he is guilty, name him. Otherwise, not. But I can see arguments the other way (eg not naming an alleged perp makes it harder to find him for coppers)
Recently, ultra-feminist campaigners have crossed over the line, to my mind. The drunken thing you mention is one example. Another is this: a few years ago they tried to have all previous sexual history ruled "irrelevant" and inadmissible in court. So if you - a man - were accused of raping your girlfriend, you were not allowed to mention that fact - ie that you and she had already had sex 300 times. The jury would never know that this was an alleged "date rape", or a "rape in a relationship", they would only know the facts of the actual night.
Absurd. Yet it nearly passed into law.
This is where we risk tilting the balance against the defendant in a profoundly disturbing way
One problem (there are others) with anonymity for the accused is this: Suppose the accused is acquitted of rape, so therefore could not be named, but is found guilty of a lesser offence still bearing a custodial sentence. The accused would then be effectively "disappeared".
Is that a problem? Surely they could just say "X was convicted of Y", and not name him in relation to the higher charge of rape.
Whatever the answer, I accept this is contentious. Debatable land. Perhaps the law as it stands is the best compromise, I am willing to be persuaded. I am not persuaded by some of the other amendments to rape law suggested by those who seek to "raise the number of convictions" without heed for natural justice
On rape cases, I'm reading the Secret Barrister's book and he talks about the Ched Evans case. At the time I couldn't work out how the new evidence was allowed as I thought the complainant's sexual past was off-limits. Turns out it isn't off-limits where it corroborates the accused's story. I guess the law is more around the defence claiming that she sleeps around so why would you believe her about this time?
What the Secret Barrister doesn't talk about is anonymity for the complainant. As I understand it, the name of the complainant in the Evans case got out and that's how the witness came forward. It may be that Evans simply got lucky. I don't know how you solve an issue like that, though.
I always had him down for a tin tin impersonator with that hair style I always look out for snowy and captain haddock
Do NOT underestimate the power of powerful hair. And Starmer's hair is perhaps his most powerful PR asset, at least at present.
Look what it's done for Boris Johnson. And what lack thereof did to (just naming two) Hague and IDS.
Critics of above will cite Winston Churchill. Yet that was in a simpler, sterner age, before the rug & the plug.
Ramsey Macdonald had a magnificent head of hair, whileAnthony Eden's hair was part-and-parcel of his post-war appeal, Harold Wilson wielded his quiff in political battle, and Margaret Thacher's helmet of hair was emblematic of the Iron Maiden.
Whereas Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain's hair was never what one would call truly adequate. And years of austerity clearly took their toll on Clement Attlee's hair, as did the stress of Philby and Profumo upon Harold Macmillan's follicules. As for Sir Alec Douglas-Home, his head was notoriously skeletal, which no much can be said about the hair of Ted Heath or Jim Callaghan except that the had some (I think). Same goes for Michael Howard.
John Major was another story; his superior hair was a crucial, if rarely-cited reason for his 1992 election victory. And there is no doubt that Theresa May's rise to power was facilitated by a strong, stylish yet sensible, approachable but authoritative hairdo. However, her permanent proved less so in the hothouse of No. 10 and wilted along with her electoral & political prospects.
AND wasn't it someone on THIS thred, who pointed to the Samson-like strength derived by Boris Johnson from his wild, abundant, unruly, frequently downright-delinquent locks? AND the great dangers he now runs, due to his visibly-thinning crown?
My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
I believe it is closer to 1 in a 1000. Either way, it is a pretty crushing argument against the insanity prevailing in Paris, Rome and Berlin. AZ is safer than the Pill. No one talks of banning the Pill, yet they ban life saving vaccines in a pandemic. How have democratic governments come to this, in the face of global death on an enormous scale?
The British government made horrific mistakes early on. They are, perhaps, partly excusable from naivety in the face of a novel virus. Still terrible.
THIS is not excusable. There is no justification. Zero. If Boris ever does something this bad he should be sent to live just southwest of Glasgow , in an ex mining town, for the rest of his living days.
She was reading The Guardian article about it which said the Germans have seen these cases in women aged 20-50 and immediately she said it might actually be related to those women taking the pill or being on HRT for the menopausal one. Neither of us are doctors and I'm barely considered a scientist these days (unless you count data) so it's obviously just speculation. Hopefully the Germans have looked into it and ruled it out but the age profile and cause seems coincidental.
Compare the Conservative vote in 2010 to that in 2019:
2010 28.1% 2019 28.9%
So an increase of 0.8%.
Now compare the increase in Conservative vote in other Cleveland / Durham constituencies:
Redcar +32.3% Bishop +27.4% Sedgefield +23.7% Middlesbrough S +23.2% Durham NW +21.9% Durham City +18.4% Darlington +16.6% Stockton N +14.7% Easington +12.7% Durham N +11.9% Stockton S +11.8% Middlesbrough +7.0%
An average of 18.5% or 17.1% if Durham City and Redcar are discounted as the Conservative vote would likely have been reduced by tactical voting for the LibDems in 2010.
So its highly likely that at least a third and possibly up to two thirds of Tice's vote were voting Conservative elsewhere in the area.
What those voters do in the byelection is one of the unknowns.
#Caprarica: "The vaccine issue could be the black swan that derails Europe. Those who reiterated the point are right: the decision to suspend Astra Zeneca was political. In Britain they wanted to reduce infections and mortality."
Apparently the EU is now accusing national governments of stockpiling the vaccine. I think. Why? Why are they so keen to have a vaccine they are so reluctant to use or for anyone else to use? Most political cock-ups involve incompetence, some involve corruption. But there's normally some point to it. This involves - what? Who benefits? I genuinely don't understand what the Europeans are playing at.
Yes, it is one of the few political calamities when it is so calamitous it is hard to see an obvious winner. Russia with Sputnik, maybe, or China. But that is quite tenuous. Pfizer? I guess. But they would have to be quite evil to stoke all this. Are they?
The fact is, humanity loses, and it is tragic. This is an excellent vaccine with minimal side effects, sold at not for profit. You can keep it in a damn fridge. It is highly likely that tens of thousands of men and women will now die, who would otherwise have lived via AZ, because of the imbecilic "suspensions" by European governments (and a couple of others) and because this will stoke global vaccine hesitancy.
I am faintly ashamed to be a European. I have genuinely never felt that before. The continent of the Enlightenment, the home of medicine and vaccination, has, for whatever reasons, been reduced to THIS
Not really the home of either medicine or vaccination. Germ Theory did not take hold in the West until late 19th Century, about 1000 years after Persian medicine. Even Neanderthals practiced herbal medicine. And various precursors of vaccination were practiced in China, India and Ottoman Turkey well before Jenner.
My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
To be fair (it's hard) there are two separate issues at play here.
1) Should the vaccine programme be suspended to investigate the possibility/reports of previously unidentified side effects of the vaccine. 2) Should the possibility of previously unidentified side effects be investigated and, if proven, what should be the outcome of this. ie. might it lead to the blocking of the vaccine, or simply an amendment to the existing guidance on side effects.
The legal issue is that to give informed consent, somebody voluntarily submitting themselves to a medical product must be made aware of all potential side effects. So there is potentially legal jeopardy if side effects are known about but not included when distributing the vaccine.
It seems obvious to most that the extent of the reported side effects are such that the balance of risks favours continuation of the vaccine programme regardless of proof of causality. Therefore the case for suspension seems, rationally, to be very weak. However if one takes the protestation of some of the European leaders at face value, then one could see that they view this as putting them in legal jeopardy. This difference between the pill and the vaccine does not rest on the likelihood of experiencing blood clots as side effects. It rests on the idea that anybody taking the pill will have been warned and therefore be an informed user, whereas anyone taking the vaccine will not.
Of course to the dispassionate observer, it seems to show how well meaning regulations, or regulations that are forced by legal security, do nothing but serve to deliver perverse outcomes to the general population. "Informed consent" is the vast majority of cases is a nonsense. The number of people who actively change their decisions on the back of it is miniscule (and probably far less than people who refuse treatments because of suspicion that things are being hidden). In other words full disclosure provides little reassurance to anyone. But in the circumstances of this vaccine, the consequences could be the unnecessary loss of thousands of lives.
And I thought the European countries to have a normal summer holiday season was the most idiotic decision of the pandemic....but the repeated cartman style meltdowns over AZN is another level.
I'm listening to the David David speech, it's extremely damning. I don't understand how this evidence was barred from the inquiry. The whole justice system in Scotland is rotten, politicised and not fit for purpose. The lines between politics and justice are so blurred that you can't tell which is which.
If I understand it (and with this whole thing I'm not always convinced I do, but...), it (or at least some of it) is evidence that Salmond offered up to the committee, if they'd just nicely contact his lawyers and ask for it.
Why the committee have chosen not to do that is a different thing. I'm sure it's almost certainly not related to the numerical composition of the committee. Cough.
I think Davis didn't actually say that many things today that weren't already known. There were a few, but not many. But the implication clearly seems to be that either it'll come out properly in the committee or it'll come out in the House of Commons.
I’ve been following the case and inquiry closely, but the revelation of Sturgeon’s CoS “interfering “ as early as 6 Feb 2018 with the investigation is a shocker. Nicola’s position has always been she only knew of an investigation on 2 April ( or 29 March going by differing evidence). The idea her trusted CoS was running rogue at that point is laughable.
That...is a pretty bold statement. And apart from anything else I have no idea what the stats were under previous governments so I have no way of knowing if the disparity between 'reports' and 'charges' has grown.
It has grown, a bit. Though I think it was always a massive discrepancy. And I think the reason it has grown is that there has been much greater encouragement to report rape (and indeed greater keenness to take it to court).
The problem with trying rape is that it is, by its nature, almost always one person's word against another. In a culture where we are innocent until proven guilty, that makes it very hard to make a conviction.
I don't understand how it is one person's word against another. If a person says they did not consent to something I'm not sure that any other person's opinion is relevant.
Because no one ever lies, or changes their mind, or gets drunk and fancies a guy but in the morning thinks they have made a mistake.
Or is unfaithful and then risks losing a boyfriend/husband, so fabricates a rape. That is far from unknown
But it's rare. The problem is mainly the other way. 90% of rapes are not reported. Of the ones that are 97% lead to no charge. And half of them are acquitted. Upshot - For every rape conviction there are approximately 1000 instances which are not punished. It IS effectively decriminalised.
ALLEGED instances. ALLEGED. This is the key. This is British justice. By all means alter the law so it is balanced between plaintiff and defendant, if you wish
But a man accused is an ALLEGED rapist, and until and unless he is convicted, he is innocent, and there is no crime
If he's a rapist, he's a rapist. But he might not be a convicted rapist.
Interesting and somewhat distressing. The tweeter is a well-known FT journalist, definitely Remain/europhile/Francophile but also fairly balanced.
The French government, confronted with the most antivax populace in Europe, has just undermined one of THE most efficacious vaccines (taken in the round) and thereby undermined ALL vaccines, in the eyes of the French
I still hope the clever nation of Moliere and Pascal will come to its senses, and get jabbed. Death focuses minds
I'm listening to the David David speech, it's extremely damning. I don't understand how this evidence was barred from the inquiry. The whole justice system in Scotland is rotten, politicised and not fit for purpose. The lines between politics and justice are so blurred that you can't tell which is which.
Basically your second sentence.
Specifically the Scottish Gov have nobbled the committee from all sides.
- It only meets half a day per week, so slow headway. - It has a Govt majority (except that the Green Rep has partly fallen out with his party). - There is no legally qualified Counsel to help with effective questioning (Westminster is the same on this). - Convener is SNP. - Parly procedure are subject to contempt of court regs (one of Davis' points), and the Crown Office is politicised - so if committee goes beyond what it can 'legally' see Crown Office has warned of Contempt of Court. - Crown Office redacted evidence 'to prevent jigsaw identification of complainers', but when the unredacted version was published the redacted bits were all about hiding things that would undermine Sturgeon. And the committee convenor has accepted the Crown Office doctrine that the redacted bits can't be considered, so committee has accepted it is not admissible.
It is quite plausible and very worrying that a major European country won't get out of first gear economically for what may become an indefinite period until a significant amount of infection derived immunity is built up resulting in a lot of unnecessary deaths.
Looks like Labour is going a bit core vote for May, to be honest.
The Starmer excuse makers are trying to say the lady who they are quoting in the ‘Tories have decriminalised rape’ advert is a government appointed QC
Well she was appointed by a government, just not this one - Theresa May appointed her...if that’s fair game then all Corbyn appointments, mistakes, anti semitism etc can be attributed to Starmer’s ‘new management’
... and she is a QC... but was also a Labour MP for 9 years before losing an unloseable seat in 2010 then getting a cushy PCC number.
And hardly a good example of a Minister or PCC whilst she was doing those jobs.
I'm listening to the David David speech, it's extremely damning. I don't understand how this evidence was barred from the inquiry. The whole justice system in Scotland is rotten, politicised and not fit for purpose. The lines between politics and justice are so blurred that you can't tell which is which.
If I understand it (and with this whole thing I'm not always convinced I do, but...), it (or at least some of it) is evidence that Salmond offered up to the committee, if they'd just nicely contact his lawyers and ask for it.
Why the committee have chosen not to do that is a different thing. I'm sure it's almost certainly not related to the numerical composition of the committee. Cough.
I think Davis didn't actually say that many things today that weren't already known. There were a few, but not many. But the implication clearly seems to be that either it'll come out properly in the committee or it'll come out in the House of Commons.
I’ve been following the case and inquiry closely, but the revelation of Sturgeon’s CoS “interfering “ as early as 6 Feb 2018 with the investigation is a shocker. Nicola’s position has always been she only knew of an investigation on 2 April ( or 29 March going by differing evidence). The idea her trusted CoS was running rogue at that point is laughable.
Yes - that did seem to be clearly new information. The bit about a civil servant intentionally removing a document or email was also something I think was also new to me. But no matter how close I follow this I do struggle to grasp every exact detail, so might not have been a new thing.
Scotland’s come a fair way from when First Ministers were forced out for making oversights in declaring interests at no personal financial gain to themselves.
"In a statement on Tuesday, the Australian medicines regulator said it had not received any reports of blood clots among people who had received the AstraZeneca vaccine. Greg Hunt, the health minister, also said the government supported continued use of the shot.
“There have been views expressed — we disagree with them clearly, absolutely, unequivocally,” he said in Parliament."
Canada and Australia not suspending their programmes, obviously we aren't either. Thailand has resumed it's own programme after pausing for a weekend with the media over there calling it an unnecessary hold up.
This looks more and more like (some of) Europe vs the world. I've got some US focussed stuff coming in tomorrow and there should an update on the status of the AZ trial in the US in it and when it should be ready for submission. The actions of the Biden administration on denying to share the AZ vaccine does seem to show that they expect to be using it fairly soon and they've got ~50m doses ready to go so it will be a big boost to them if it gets rapid approval.
Interesting and somewhat distressing. The tweeter is a well-known FT journalist, definitely Remain/europhile/Francophile but also fairly balanced.
The French government, confronted with the most antivax populace in Europe, has just undermined one of THE most efficacious vaccines (taken in the round) and thereby undermined ALL vaccines, in the eyes of the French
I still hope the clever nation of Moliere and Pascal will come to its senses, and get jabbed. Death focuses minds
It is upsettingly plausible, however
But it wouldn't get that bad, surely? Even with 50% unvaccinated the spread would slow considerably, and eventually enough of the unvaccinated population would catch it and become immune. France will face problems opening up, but it'll be at worst a delay rather than an indefinite postponement. Surely? If I'm wrong, Macron is surely doomed.
Scotland is going to need a complete replacement of its government and civil service - if this can be made to stick. The reason it won't be made to stick is because this story is so massive - the whole governing mechanism has been corrupted.
Looks like Labour is going a bit core vote for May, to be honest.
The Starmer excuse makers are trying to say the lady who they are quoting in the ‘Tories have decriminalised rape’ advert is a government appointed QC
Well she was appointed by a government, just not this one - Theresa May appointed her...if that’s fair game then all Corbyn appointments, mistakes, anti semitism etc can be attributed to Starmer’s ‘new management’
... and she is a QC... but was also a Labour MP for 9 years before losing an unloseable seat in 2010 then getting a cushy PCC number.
And hardly a good example of a Minister or PCC whilst she was doing those jobs.
It says everything about the Wallyness of partisan politics that Labour are trying to pretend she was an independent QC appointed by this government - the last bit is just a bare faced lie
#Caprarica: "The vaccine issue could be the black swan that derails Europe. Those who reiterated the point are right: the decision to suspend Astra Zeneca was political. In Britain they wanted to reduce infections and mortality."
Scotland is going to need a complete replacement of its government and civil service - if this can be made to stick. The reason it won't be made to stick is because this story is so massive - the whole governing mechanism has been corrupted.
Pete Wishart on Twitter calls Davis' suggestions 'a full frontal attack on our institutions' - it would be very funny if the SNP does oppose the SP being given more powers and privileges. And a very revealing moment to anyone who thinks that Scotland's best interests are their primary motivating factor.
Apparently the EU is now accusing national governments of stockpiling the vaccine. I think. Why? Why are they so keen to have a vaccine they are so reluctant to use or for anyone else to use? Most political cock-ups involve incompetence, some involve corruption. But there's normally some point to it. This involves - what? Who benefits? I genuinely don't understand what the Europeans are playing at.
Yes, it is one of the few political calamities when it is so calamitous it is hard to see an obvious winner. Russia with Sputnik, maybe, or China. But that is quite tenuous. Pfizer? I guess. But they would have to be quite evil to stoke all this. Are they?
The fact is, humanity loses, and it is tragic. This is an excellent vaccine with minimal side effects, sold at not for profit. You can keep it in a damn fridge. It is highly likely that tens of thousands of men and women will now die, who would otherwise have lived via AZ, because of the imbecilic "suspensions" by European governments (and a couple of others) and because this will stoke global vaccine hesitancy.
I am faintly ashamed to be a European. I have genuinely never felt that before. The continent of the Enlightenment, the home of medicine and vaccination, has, for whatever reasons, been reduced to THIS
Not really the home of either medicine or vaccination. Germ Theory did not take hold in the West until late 19th Century, about 1000 years after Persian medicine. Even Neanderthals practiced herbal medicine. And various precursors of vaccination were practiced in China, India and Ottoman Turkey well before Jenner.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
The other thing you can do is take it one step further and try and think about games that are based on movies which themselves were originally based on games.
I'm pretty sure there was a game based on the Street Fighter movie (the one with Van Damme and Kylie) for the Saturn.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
The other thing you can do is take it one step further and try and think about games that are based on movies which themselves were originally based on games.
I'm pretty sure there was a game based on the Street Fighter movie (the one with Van Damme and Kylie) for the Saturn.
The Lego Batman movie is a film based on a toy based on a film based on a comic book.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
Although curiously one of the biggest movie franchises of all time is based on a fictional board game.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
The other thing you can do is take it one step further and try and think about games that are based on movies which themselves were originally based on games.
I'm pretty sure there was a game based on the Street Fighter movie (the one with Van Damme and Kylie) for the Saturn.
The Lego Batman movie is a film based on a toy based on a film based on a comic book.
Oh, and then there are toys based on the film, as well.
To all those yesterday who took part in my quiz question asking for films based on games - great answers (some I wasn't aware of). Some others I think were missed: -Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue) -Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire) -Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia -Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games -Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
Although curiously one of the biggest movie franchises of all time is based on a fictional board game.
Have you added in all the UKIPER/BREXITY Party voters from 2019 to the Conservative column? If you do it becomes quite clear.
A lot of them won't go Conservative though. This is what Farage knew. A lot of old Labour just can't bring themselves to vote Tory... Without BXP most of their voters will stay at home.
That can't be true though, can it? When you look at the swings in the red wall seats for 2019, old labour voters must be going for the tories, musn't they? and plenty of them.
Perhaps in some seats. But I just can't see Hartlepool ever voting in a Conservative MP.
But we'll see I guess.
I know what you mean. I still can't believe some of the seats that did go, went, though. Bolsover!
I'm glad Skinner was there to be defeated rather than the seat flipped after he left. It's no matter to me if seats in the area are Tory or Labour, and maybe he was actually a nice man (and must have worked hard for his constituents), but he seemed like one of those people who delight in being rude to opponents which gets my back up. Not saying faux courtesy like JRM is the way to go, but I know too many politicians who get on great in a personal capacity with opponents to think you need to be so partisan.
Still, his victorious opponent has called for him to get a statue, which is pretty funny.
I'll look forward to pulling Skinner's statue down.
Apparently the EU is now accusing national governments of stockpiling the vaccine. I think. Why? Why are they so keen to have a vaccine they are so reluctant to use or for anyone else to use? Most political cock-ups involve incompetence, some involve corruption. But there's normally some point to it. This involves - what? Who benefits? I genuinely don't understand what the Europeans are playing at.
Yes, it is one of the few political calamities when it is so calamitous it is hard to see an obvious winner. Russia with Sputnik, maybe, or China. But that is quite tenuous. Pfizer? I guess. But they would have to be quite evil to stoke all this. Are they?
The fact is, humanity loses, and it is tragic. This is an excellent vaccine with minimal side effects, sold at not for profit. You can keep it in a damn fridge. It is highly likely that tens of thousands of men and women will now die, who would otherwise have lived via AZ, because of the imbecilic "suspensions" by European governments (and a couple of others) and because this will stoke global vaccine hesitancy.
I am faintly ashamed to be a European. I have genuinely never felt that before. The continent of the Enlightenment, the home of medicine and vaccination, has, for whatever reasons, been reduced to THIS
Not really the home of either medicine or vaccination. Germ Theory did not take hold in the West until late 19th Century, about 1000 years after Persian medicine. Even Neanderthals practiced herbal medicine. And various precursors of vaccination were practiced in China, India and Ottoman Turkey well before Jenner.
Oh that's alright then!
Not sure what you mean by that. Care to elaborate?
Drug regulators in Nepal are investigating how a Bahraini prince was able to take Covid-19 vaccine into the country without permission.
Mohamed Hamad Mohamed al-Khalifa arrived in Nepal on Monday, with about 2,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine.
The Bahraini embassy told Nepalese media that the prince's team wanted to donate the vaccine to villagers in the Gorkha district.
On Tuesday Thaneshwor Guragain, a spokesperson for Seven Summits Trek - the company arranging Prince al-Khalifa's trip - told the Himalayan Times that after quarantining for seven days, the group would travel to the Chumnurbi Rural Municipality, in Gorkha district.
There, he said, they planned to "distribute 2,000 doses of AstraZeneca vaccines against the Covid-19 infection for the people of Samagaun village".
The prince and his team planned to climb Mount Everest afterwards, Mr Guragain added.
My wife tonight showed me her contraceptive pill notes and one of the listed severe side effects is actually thrombosis, having looked it up it's a 1 in 10,000 chance of developing severe thrombosis for the type of contraceptive pill she takes. Obviously she still takes it anyway, but she was pretty scathing over the double standards being applied to the vaccine which has no causal link proved yet Germany and other European countries have granted full licences for the pill which has a known causal link to blood clots.
I believe it is closer to 1 in a 1000. Either way, it is a pretty crushing argument against the insanity prevailing in Paris, Rome and Berlin. AZ is safer than the Pill. No one talks of banning the Pill, yet they ban life saving vaccines in a pandemic. How have democratic governments come to this, in the face of global death on an enormous scale?
The British government made horrific mistakes early on. They are, perhaps, partly excusable from naivety in the face of a novel virus. Still terrible.
THIS is not excusable. There is no justification. Zero. If Boris ever does something this bad he should be sent to live just southwest of Glasgow , in an ex mining town, for the rest of his living days.
She was reading The Guardian article about it which said the Germans have seen these cases in women aged 20-50 and immediately she said it might actually be related to those women taking the pill or being on HRT for the menopausal one. Neither of us are doctors and I'm barely considered a scientist these days (unless you count data) so it's obviously just speculation. Hopefully the Germans have looked into it and ruled it out but the age profile and cause seems coincidental.
If that is true (that they are mostly women aged 20-50) then that's a big coincidence.
Even if there was a correlation with the vaccine (which it seems there isn't, but anyway, assuming there is), I was wondering what the analgesic of choice is in Germany.
Ibuprofen has blood clot risks. There's always a chance that any flu-like effects of the vaccine might lead people to take painkillers which themselves have undesirable side effects.
This is a human tragedy. Many will die who did not have to die, because continental European politicians lost their minds, and their senses, over nothing. Apart from maybe panic, and a dash of spite.
The end result will be a huge diminution in European prestige. This benefits no one in Europe, including Brits. China and Russia will appear the sane alternatives
This is a human tragedy. Many will die who did not have to die, because continental European politicians lost their minds, and their senses, over nothing. Apart from maybe panic, and a dash of spite.
The end result will be a huge diminution in European prestige. This benefits no one in Europe, including Brits. China and Russia will appear the sane alternatives
The best hope for AZN to recover is for the FDA to approve it soon.
US reaction to European moves against the AZN vaccine:
"Countries across Europe are pausing use of AstraZeneca-Oxford University's COVID-19 vaccine, saying they are acting out of caution, but U.S. scientists say it's an irresponsible move that threatens the global vaccination effort and the opportunity to end the pandemic.
""While it's easy to scare people, it's very hard to unscare them," said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an infectious disease specialist at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia."
Apparently the EU is now accusing national governments of stockpiling the vaccine. I think. Why? Why are they so keen to have a vaccine they are so reluctant to use or for anyone else to use? Most political cock-ups involve incompetence, some involve corruption. But there's normally some point to it. This involves - what? Who benefits? I genuinely don't understand what the Europeans are playing at.
Yes, it is one of the few political calamities when it is so calamitous it is hard to see an obvious winner. Russia with Sputnik, maybe, or China. But that is quite tenuous. Pfizer? I guess. But they would have to be quite evil to stoke all this. Are they?
The fact is, humanity loses, and it is tragic. This is an excellent vaccine with minimal side effects, sold at not for profit. You can keep it in a damn fridge. It is highly likely that tens of thousands of men and women will now die, who would otherwise have lived via AZ, because of the imbecilic "suspensions" by European governments (and a couple of others) and because this will stoke global vaccine hesitancy.
I am faintly ashamed to be a European. I have genuinely never felt that before. The continent of the Enlightenment, the home of medicine and vaccination, has, for whatever reasons, been reduced to THIS
Not really the home of either medicine or vaccination. Germ Theory did not take hold in the West until late 19th Century, about 1000 years after Persian medicine. Even Neanderthals practiced herbal medicine. And various precursors of vaccination were practiced in China, India and Ottoman Turkey well before Jenner.
But surely the Neanderthals lived in the Netherlands? You just have to rearrange the letters.
I genuinely love the central European tendency to just ffing say what they think. Doesn't matter if I agree with them or not, it's refreshing.
You are slightly off. What they've got, is the skill & cunning, to just ffing say what they think, what YOU want them to think.
Of course, the fine folk east & south from old Vienna DO have a robust way about them that CAN be quite refreshing. Though on occasion one MIGHT wish they would curb their enthusiasm.
Like in 1940, when Adolf Hitler had to tell the Romanians to STOP killing Jews, in various old-fashioned ways in streets, because they were getting way too carried away for even the Fuhrer's fine sensibilities.
Can't say I've got much stomach for the current Polish Putinist regime. Speaking as someone who helped out the (post-Commie) political arm of Solidarity, before it split between (relative) liberals and (at best) reactionaries. With the latter in charge in Warsaw.
I turned from being a young Eurosceptic to a Europhile at law school when I thought that the EU could act as a check and balance to the almost unfettered power (now the Lords and the Monarchy are little more than cyphers) of the majority party in the Commons. But being in the EU has not prevented the rise of authoritarianism in Poland and Hungary so I've had to revisit my base case for membership.
Comments
When people ask if a drug is absolutely safe / risk free, no, no a drug is absolutely safe, they all have a number of side effects in a small number of people....but overall the reason they are used is the benefits massively outweigh these observed effects.
You only have to look at the pamphlet that comes with anything and it contains a landry list of potential side effects, all of which will have been observed in somebody, hence why they are on there.
Whatever the answer, I accept this is contentious. Debatable land. Perhaps the law as it stands is the best compromise, I am willing to be persuaded. I am not persuaded by some of the other amendments to rape law suggested by those who seek to "raise the number of convictions" without heed for natural justice
What the Secret Barrister doesn't talk about is anonymity for the complainant. As I understand it, the name of the complainant in the Evans case got out and that's how the witness came forward. It may be that Evans simply got lucky. I don't know how you solve an issue like that, though.
Poor Theresa started her time in No. 10 looking BOUFFANT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twjZ1G7usi8
But sadly the with the hair, went the political fortunes. I am not posting a photo from the end, because they're too sad.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1371911395395112965?s=19
https://twitter.com/bbcrosatkins/status/1371574236473561092?s=21
Compare the Conservative vote in 2010 to that in 2019:
2010 28.1%
2019 28.9%
So an increase of 0.8%.
Now compare the increase in Conservative vote in other Cleveland / Durham constituencies:
Redcar +32.3%
Bishop +27.4%
Sedgefield +23.7%
Middlesbrough S +23.2%
Durham NW +21.9%
Durham City +18.4%
Darlington +16.6%
Stockton N +14.7%
Easington +12.7%
Durham N +11.9%
Stockton S +11.8%
Middlesbrough +7.0%
An average of 18.5% or 17.1% if Durham City and Redcar are discounted as the Conservative vote would likely have been reduced by tactical voting for the LibDems in 2010.
So its highly likely that at least a third and possibly up to two thirds of Tice's vote were voting Conservative elsewhere in the area.
What those voters do in the byelection is one of the unknowns.
#Caprarica: "The vaccine issue could be the black swan that derails Europe. Those who reiterated the point are right: the decision to suspend Astra Zeneca was political. In Britain they wanted to reduce infections and mortality."
RAI3.
https://twitter.com/Cartabiancarai3/status/1371956904025591812?s=20
1) Should the vaccine programme be suspended to investigate the possibility/reports of previously unidentified side effects of the vaccine.
2) Should the possibility of previously unidentified side effects be investigated and, if proven, what should be the outcome of this. ie. might it lead to the blocking of the vaccine, or simply an amendment to the existing guidance on side effects.
The legal issue is that to give informed consent, somebody voluntarily submitting themselves to a medical product must be made aware of all potential side effects. So there is potentially legal jeopardy if side effects are known about but not included when distributing the vaccine.
It seems obvious to most that the extent of the reported side effects are such that the balance of risks favours continuation of the vaccine programme regardless of proof of causality. Therefore the case for suspension seems, rationally, to be very weak. However if one takes the protestation of some of the European leaders at face value, then one could see that they view this as putting them in legal jeopardy. This difference between the pill and the vaccine does not rest on the likelihood of experiencing blood clots as side effects. It rests on the idea that anybody taking the pill will have been warned and therefore be an informed user, whereas anyone taking the vaccine will not.
Of course to the dispassionate observer, it seems to show how well meaning regulations, or regulations that are forced by legal security, do nothing but serve to deliver perverse outcomes to the general population. "Informed consent" is the vast majority of cases is a nonsense. The number of people who actively change their decisions on the back of it is miniscule (and probably far less than people who refuse treatments because of suspicion that things are being hidden). In other words full disclosure provides little reassurance to anyone. But in the circumstances of this vaccine, the consequences could be the unnecessary loss of thousands of lives.
Night all.
https://twitter.com/KuperSimon/status/1371899212594622470
The French government, confronted with the most antivax populace in Europe, has just undermined one of THE most efficacious vaccines (taken in the round) and thereby undermined ALL vaccines, in the eyes of the French
I still hope the clever nation of Moliere and Pascal will come to its senses, and get jabbed. Death focuses minds
It is upsettingly plausible, however
Specifically the Scottish Gov have nobbled the committee from all sides.
- It only meets half a day per week, so slow headway.
- It has a Govt majority (except that the Green Rep has partly fallen out with his party).
- There is no legally qualified Counsel to help with effective questioning (Westminster is the same on this).
- Convener is SNP.
- Parly procedure are subject to contempt of court regs (one of Davis' points), and the Crown Office is politicised - so if committee goes beyond what it can 'legally' see Crown Office has warned of Contempt of Court.
- Crown Office redacted evidence 'to prevent jigsaw identification of complainers', but when the unredacted version was published the redacted bits were all about hiding things that would undermine Sturgeon. And the committee convenor has accepted the Crown Office doctrine that the redacted bits can't be considered, so committee has accepted it is not admissible.
And a whole lot more..
"In a statement on Tuesday, the Australian medicines regulator said it had not received any reports of blood clots among people who had received the AstraZeneca vaccine. Greg Hunt, the health minister, also said the government supported continued use of the shot.
“There have been views expressed — we disagree with them clearly, absolutely, unequivocally,” he said in Parliament."
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/03/16/world/covid-19-coronavirus#as-europe-suspends-astrazeneca-shots-other-countries-move-ahead-with-them
Canada and Australia not suspending their programmes, obviously we aren't either. Thailand has resumed it's own programme after pausing for a weekend with the media over there calling it an unnecessary hold up.
This looks more and more like (some of) Europe vs the world. I've got some US focussed stuff coming in tomorrow and there should an update on the status of the AZ trial in the US in it and when it should be ready for submission. The actions of the Biden administration on denying to share the AZ vaccine does seem to show that they expect to be using it fairly soon and they've got ~50m doses ready to go so it will be a big boost to them if it gets rapid approval.
If I'm wrong, Macron is surely doomed.
"n Britain they wanted to reduce infections and mortality.""
But on the mainland they sacrifice their population for ... what reason?
-Clue (based on Cluedo, which in the States is called Clue)
-Silent Hill (based on the horror computer game of the same name, which is itself based on the story of Centralia - a US coal mining town that is to this day (I believe) on fire)
-Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - based on the Prince of Persia games. This film is not that old, and is a fun enough caper, but I think is quite out of favour these days to starring the very white Jake Ghylanhaall (sp?) and Gemma Arterton as Prince and Princess of Persia
-Hitman (1,2 and 3) based on the eponymous games
-Tomb Raider films
There are a lot based on computer games these days. Films based on board games are harder to come by.
I'm pretty sure there was a game based on the Street Fighter movie (the one with Van Damme and Kylie) for the Saturn.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-56407377
Drug regulators in Nepal are investigating how a Bahraini prince was able to take Covid-19 vaccine into the country without permission.
Mohamed Hamad Mohamed al-Khalifa arrived in Nepal on Monday, with about 2,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine.
The Bahraini embassy told Nepalese media that the prince's team wanted to donate the vaccine to villagers in the Gorkha district.
On Tuesday Thaneshwor Guragain, a spokesperson for Seven Summits Trek - the company arranging Prince al-Khalifa's trip - told the Himalayan Times that after quarantining for seven days, the group would travel to the Chumnurbi Rural Municipality, in Gorkha district.
There, he said, they planned to "distribute 2,000 doses of AstraZeneca vaccines against the Covid-19 infection for the people of Samagaun village".
The prince and his team planned to climb Mount Everest afterwards, Mr Guragain added.
Even if there was a correlation with the vaccine (which it seems there isn't, but anyway, assuming there is), I was wondering what the analgesic of choice is in Germany.
Ibuprofen has blood clot risks. There's always a chance that any flu-like effects of the vaccine might lead people to take painkillers which themselves have undesirable side effects.
https://twitter.com/elnacionalweb/status/1371993779926937600?s=21
This is a human tragedy. Many will die who did not have to die, because continental European politicians lost their minds, and their senses, over nothing. Apart from maybe panic, and a dash of spite.
The end result will be a huge diminution in European prestige. This benefits no one in Europe, including Brits. China and Russia will appear the sane alternatives
"Countries across Europe are pausing use of AstraZeneca-Oxford University's COVID-19 vaccine, saying they are acting out of caution, but U.S. scientists say it's an irresponsible move that threatens the global vaccination effort and the opportunity to end the pandemic.
""While it's easy to scare people, it's very hard to unscare them," said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an infectious disease specialist at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/03/16/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-europe-us-experts-coronavirus/4714377001/