Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

What happened when I switched the CON and LAB GE2019 vote shares on the Electoral Calculus seat pred

12346

Comments

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547
    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    They can't because most of their activists believe in all that stuff.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587

    CROSS OVER ALERT

    England numbers....

    1st vaccination - 176,063
    2nd 233,828

    Good news. Two members of my family had their second doses in the last few days.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,083

    CROSS OVER ALERT

    England numbers....

    1st vaccination - 176,063
    2nd 233,828

    Bloody oldies hogging all the vaccine supply.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Yes, it is and by quite some margin too. Only Wales also has 2nd more than 1st and not by much although they have had a much shorter gap until 2nd doses.

    I am expecting in the next few days the 1st doses to rapidly fall away unless they can pull some extra vaccines out of the hat.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,996
    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    https://twitter.com/AngryScotland/status/1377244655474118656?s=20
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    They can't because most of their activists believe in all that stuff.
    At the moment many Labour people believe the Tories believe and deliver more of this agenda than Labour do or could.

    There are a fair number of potential Labour votes lost to the Tories today simply by getting an official sounding report out saying the the UK isn't institutionally racist.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    TimT said:

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1377157797993832449?s=20

    I presume mini-Trump is going to lock down France properly?

    It's either that or....war.
    https://twitter.com/PedderSophie/status/1376428536614027264
    Heard this on the radio while driving. The concept that technologies come and go, but primitive war endures always rings true to me. We will always need an infantry, trained in close quarter fighting, able to fight without technology:

    https://www.npr.org/2021/03/18/978832042/years-of-military-service-helped-inform-2034-a-novel-of-the-next-world-war
    So what do we do ? cut the bloody infantry
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,598
    Leeds Central, Leeds NW, Leeds W, Leeds NE, Leeds E - all have Labour MPs.

    Enough said.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Leeds Central, Leeds NW, Leeds W, Leeds NE, Leeds E - all have Labour MPs.

    Enough said.
    Stamping out wrong thought must take precedence over clean streets comrade
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    They can't because most of their activists believe in all that stuff.
    At the moment many Labour people believe the Tories believe and deliver more of this agenda than Labour do or could.

    There are a fair number of potential Labour votes lost to the Tories today simply by getting an official sounding report out saying the the UK isn't institutionally racist.

    And vice for versa for Labour claiming it is
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    edited March 2021
    Leon said:

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
    Interestingly two of the four nations administered more second doses than first yesterday – that's new ground.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    edited March 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    100,000 people live in the Mansfield constituency. Just dismissing like this isn't going to be a successful electoral strategy.
    Who said it was? I was simply pointing out what a ridiculous comment the OP made. Why would we want more Mansfields than Putneys? Absolutely bizarre thing to say.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Leon said:

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
    First doses are slowing down. That was 224,590 first doses yesterday, the lowest since 9 March (217,301).

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    100,000 people live in the Mansfield constituency. Just dismissing like this isn't going to be a successful electoral strategy.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Younger folk (sub 25 years old I reckon) have a real issue with litter. I can just about understand leaving it behind at festivals when you've paid £300 and have designated litter collecters on a private field but to leave a public park looking like a shitheap is really poor form. Perhaps they don't care for Greta after all.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,816
    edited March 2021
    Brom said:

    Younger folk (sub 25 years old I reckon) have a real issue with litter. I can just about understand leaving it behind at festivals when you've paid £300 and have designated litter collecters on a private field but to leave a public park looking like a shitheap is really poor form. Perhaps they don't care for Greta after all.
    Obviously not going to excuse littering but FFS can people on Twitter especially, not keep focusing on the negative (brrr no social distancing , littering ) and perhaps see it is also as evidence of people having a good time for once in this miserable covid-19 obsessed society we are in
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822
    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
    First doses are slowing down. That was 224,590 first doses yesterday, the lowest since 9 March (217,301).

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
    But they have to as second doses are ramping up. I'm not bothered about that.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587

    The least popular credo in the UK (and on PB) is seemingly that of my own:

    The Six Ells.

    Leans left
    Largely liberal
    Loosely libertarian

    Who will stand up for the Six Ells?

    I thought there were loads of people on PB with those viewpoints.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
    You're never gonna get it are you? Sorry.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    Apparently littering is connected to Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1377189291361763335

    Seems quite a stretch given that the crowd causing it was very young in age and they clearly voted (if they were able to 5 years ago) in a majority to Remain.

    My theory is that youngsters are used to someone else doing things for them that they don't want. As a father of 3 I fall into this trap. I think anyone caught littering should be made to do a day's litter picking.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822
    TimT said:

    Cookie said:

    I kinda agree with the government's report today.

    I've said on here many times that my life outcomes were determined by

    1) The profession of my father and grandparents

    2) Where I lived

    3) The schools my parents chose (and paid for)

    To lump me in some black kid on sink estate in London who goes to a bog standard comprehensive because we're in the catch all term BAME is ridiculous.

    Obviously my talents helped a lot as well, as Harrow shows just because your parents pay huge school fees it still doesn't help if you're thick as pig poo.

    Yes - I'd agree with that. Though I think even more important is 4) the stability of your family background.
    I can think of plenty of people who have overcome disadvantages in category 1, if 2, 3 and especially 4 have been in in place.

    The headstart I had in life over my Pakistani-heritage schoolfriend* who also had a comfortable middle class upbringing in a comfortable and stable middle class family and attended a comfortable middle class school in a comfortable middle class suburb in almost non-existent, compared to the headstart we both have over my white colleague who grew up in Skelmersdale and went to a school where any attempt to learn resulted in ostracisation and/or actual violence.

    *his father, on the other hand, who managed to achieve this comfortable middle class base after arriving in the country as an illegal immigrant and starting his own business, had to overcome rather more.
    Yes, 4 and the fact they took an interest in my education.

    Made sure I did all the right things, spent time to ensure I did as well.

    Also told me that if I worked hard in my education I’d be able to choose a great career and earn serious wonga so I can do and buy whatever I wanted.

    I think middle class parents are very pushy in that regards.

    At my school I wasn’t the only child whose parents saw anything other than an A as a failure.
    I got 4 As and and E at A Level. My father's reaction? "What happened with the E?" [Advanced Maths - took Maths a year early, lost interest, thought I could wing it without doing the work, was wrong].
    I got 7 As and a D at GCSE. The D was for art.
    Now I'm not great at art, but I was always mildly disappointed that I was rated one of the three worst in the year. Which I didn't think was fair.
    I've recently found out, 25 years later, that the issue was that my art teacher - who effectively marks these things - suspected my mum was doing my work for me, because my output was wildly inconsistent. She wasn't - I was just wildly inconsistent.
    This minor disappointment has had no impact on my life whatsoever.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Cookie said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
    First doses are slowing down. That was 224,590 first doses yesterday, the lowest since 9 March (217,301).

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
    But they have to as second doses are ramping up. I'm not bothered about that.
    Oh absolutely second doses are the priority, but ideally we'd be getting more and more doses. Hopefully that will happen by May.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    Brom said:

    Younger folk (sub 25 years old I reckon) have a real issue with litter. I can just about understand leaving it behind at festivals when you've paid £300 and have designated litter collecters on a private field but to leave a public park looking like a shitheap is really poor form. Perhaps they don't care for Greta after all.
    Obviously not going to excuse littering but FFS can people on Twitter especially, not keep focusing on the negative (brrr no social distancing , littering ) and perhaps see it is also as evidence of people having a good time for once in this miserable covid-19 obsessed society we are in
    Tbf Ive been having park beers throughout lockdown and always dispose of the empties at home or in a public bin. I think there's enough images from yesterday to show people were out having a good time, it's the images today that are poor form.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587
    edited March 2021

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    Putney is definitely better than Mansfield in some respects but I can also think of reasons why Mansfield would be a more desirable place to live than Putney.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    Vaccine numbers won't be so readily accessible at 2pm over Easter.
    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377251991211106304
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    tlg86 said:

    Cookie said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    Excellent

    No real slowdown. Yet
    First doses are slowing down. That was 224,590 first doses yesterday, the lowest since 9 March (217,301).

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
    But they have to as second doses are ramping up. I'm not bothered about that.
    Oh absolutely second doses are the priority, but ideally we'd be getting more and more doses. Hopefully that will happen by May.
    Half a million doses a day is pretty good. At that rate we can vaccinate a quarter of the country per month.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,816
    edited March 2021

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    I wen to school in Mansfield and was brought up near it . It is not as extreme in social depravation, lack of ambition or grimness as it is sometime portrayed. then again it is not full of true salt of the earth working class either who are only let down by metro type people elsewhere. There is good , bad , hope, negativity , KFCs , Gastro pubs , good schools , bad schools like nearly everywhere else. The only absolute good thing about it is its surrounding countryside and parks - Sherwood Forest, Sherwood Pines ("Clipo forest" to many a native) Rufford Park (superb example of a council run park) , Clumber Park , Newstead Abbey
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited March 2021
    There's some interesting stuff in this article in The Times (£):

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-decision-on-astrazeneca-jab-is-over-reaction-ps82mkgtl

    It points out that the potential logical flaw in saying 'we have found a small but unusual increase in one particular rare medical condition' amongst those vaccinated. The potential flaw is that, in any large-scale vaccination or drug programme, if you look for every possible combination of rare events, you can expect by chance to find a cluster of some type of rare event out of the thousands of possible types. So the statistical question you should be asking isn't 'What is the chance of getting a cluster of this particular type of serious rare event?', it is 'What is the chance of getting a cluster of any one of many possible types of serious rare event?'

    Of course, if you have a scientific reason to expect this particular kind of rare event to be associated with the vaccine, that alters the picture. There has been a paper from the Paul Ehrlich Institute proposing a possible mechanism for the link, which may be why the German regulators have reacted as they have. But in the absence of corroborating data from the UK, it looks pretty tenuous.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Cookie said:

    TimT said:

    Cookie said:

    I kinda agree with the government's report today.

    I've said on here many times that my life outcomes were determined by

    1) The profession of my father and grandparents

    2) Where I lived

    3) The schools my parents chose (and paid for)

    To lump me in some black kid on sink estate in London who goes to a bog standard comprehensive because we're in the catch all term BAME is ridiculous.

    Obviously my talents helped a lot as well, as Harrow shows just because your parents pay huge school fees it still doesn't help if you're thick as pig poo.

    Yes - I'd agree with that. Though I think even more important is 4) the stability of your family background.
    I can think of plenty of people who have overcome disadvantages in category 1, if 2, 3 and especially 4 have been in in place.

    The headstart I had in life over my Pakistani-heritage schoolfriend* who also had a comfortable middle class upbringing in a comfortable and stable middle class family and attended a comfortable middle class school in a comfortable middle class suburb in almost non-existent, compared to the headstart we both have over my white colleague who grew up in Skelmersdale and went to a school where any attempt to learn resulted in ostracisation and/or actual violence.

    *his father, on the other hand, who managed to achieve this comfortable middle class base after arriving in the country as an illegal immigrant and starting his own business, had to overcome rather more.
    Yes, 4 and the fact they took an interest in my education.

    Made sure I did all the right things, spent time to ensure I did as well.

    Also told me that if I worked hard in my education I’d be able to choose a great career and earn serious wonga so I can do and buy whatever I wanted.

    I think middle class parents are very pushy in that regards.

    At my school I wasn’t the only child whose parents saw anything other than an A as a failure.
    I got 4 As and and E at A Level. My father's reaction? "What happened with the E?" [Advanced Maths - took Maths a year early, lost interest, thought I could wing it without doing the work, was wrong].
    I got 7 As and a D at GCSE. The D was for art.
    Now I'm not great at art, but I was always mildly disappointed that I was rated one of the three worst in the year. Which I didn't think was fair.
    I've recently found out, 25 years later, that the issue was that my art teacher - who effectively marks these things - suspected my mum was doing my work for me, because my output was wildly inconsistent. She wasn't - I was just wildly inconsistent.
    This minor disappointment has had no impact on my life whatsoever.
    It was my first lesson in "not everything in life is going to be easy" and that, even in areas where one is talented, you need to apply yourself. Not sure I have applied that lesson sufficiently consistently throughout my career.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204

    I think that is first day of more 2nd doses than 1st in England.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1377246142476468224?s=19

    That pattern WILL continue indefinitely now.

    ~England~

    Almost 60% of adults have received a vaccination in the first three months, we won't hit 100% due to exclusions and hesitancy so realistically we're looking at another 25-30% or so I think (Still world leading !). And we've got till the end of July for that, 12.5 million first jabs or so. 12 weeks from now is the 23rd June where we need ~ 23 million 2nd jabs.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:



    It's funny because my memory of Blair is he did the opposite.

    He was all about being modern not old fashioned, did loads for (then) woke issues like gay rights, hate crimes, set up equalities commission etc.

    He was pro inmigration

    But he SOLD it as patriotic firm government. Cool Britannia. Tough on crime, tough on the causes. Etc

    He then smuggled through a lot of ‘progressive’ stuff - some good, some bad - because he got the job done. Life seemed to improve. Government was stable. If he hadn’t invaded Iraq he might now be enjoying his seventh term in office

    I think that's right. The thing about social reform - gay marriage etc. - is that most people have a view (often surprisingly tolerant) but don't care as much as they do about bread-and-butter issues; the people who do care are mostly passionately in favour. So if you can persuade the majority that the bread and butter will be delivered, they'll take a bit of social stuff with a shrug. Blair didn't conceal the fact that he was going to liberalise gay rights etc., but he didn't go on about it as his central theme.

    Starmer believes that we need to establish a base of acceptance that Labour is sensible, patriotic and moderate. Only when he's gone on about that till we're all bored to tears with it can he get a hearing for the good stuff.

    I think the line that the party is full of Corbynites just awaiting their moment won't prove durable - certainly in reality the Corbynites have largely either said "Oh well, OK" (which is about where I am) or have gone completely passive or quit altogether. There will always be someone somewhere saying something off-message, but people don't pay much attention unless they've actually heard of them - "Councillor Bloggs from Little Snoring says he loves Stalin" doesn't really work..

    There's a new YouGov poll of Labour members out today. Lots of depressing stuff on anti-Semitism, sadly, but Starmer leads Corbyn by 61% to 29% on leader preference.

  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    Cookie said:

    TimT said:

    Cookie said:

    I kinda agree with the government's report today.

    I've said on here many times that my life outcomes were determined by

    1) The profession of my father and grandparents

    2) Where I lived

    3) The schools my parents chose (and paid for)

    To lump me in some black kid on sink estate in London who goes to a bog standard comprehensive because we're in the catch all term BAME is ridiculous.

    Obviously my talents helped a lot as well, as Harrow shows just because your parents pay huge school fees it still doesn't help if you're thick as pig poo.

    Yes - I'd agree with that. Though I think even more important is 4) the stability of your family background.
    I can think of plenty of people who have overcome disadvantages in category 1, if 2, 3 and especially 4 have been in in place.

    The headstart I had in life over my Pakistani-heritage schoolfriend* who also had a comfortable middle class upbringing in a comfortable and stable middle class family and attended a comfortable middle class school in a comfortable middle class suburb in almost non-existent, compared to the headstart we both have over my white colleague who grew up in Skelmersdale and went to a school where any attempt to learn resulted in ostracisation and/or actual violence.

    *his father, on the other hand, who managed to achieve this comfortable middle class base after arriving in the country as an illegal immigrant and starting his own business, had to overcome rather more.
    Yes, 4 and the fact they took an interest in my education.

    Made sure I did all the right things, spent time to ensure I did as well.

    Also told me that if I worked hard in my education I’d be able to choose a great career and earn serious wonga so I can do and buy whatever I wanted.

    I think middle class parents are very pushy in that regards.

    At my school I wasn’t the only child whose parents saw anything other than an A as a failure.
    I got 4 As and and E at A Level. My father's reaction? "What happened with the E?" [Advanced Maths - took Maths a year early, lost interest, thought I could wing it without doing the work, was wrong].
    I got 7 As and a D at GCSE. The D was for art.
    Now I'm not great at art, but I was always mildly disappointed that I was rated one of the three worst in the year. Which I didn't think was fair.
    I've recently found out, 25 years later, that the issue was that my art teacher - who effectively marks these things - suspected my mum was doing my work for me, because my output was wildly inconsistent. She wasn't - I was just wildly inconsistent.
    This minor disappointment has had no impact on my life whatsoever.
    My Mum always did my art homework for me. Although I dropped art as soon as I could and didn't get anywhere near GCSE. I don't think this has caused me a problem in life.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,671
    edited March 2021

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    I wen to school in Mansfield and was brought up near it . It is not as extreme in social depravation, lack of ambition or grimness as it is sometime portrayed. then again it is not full of true salt of the earth working class either who are only let down by metro type people elsewhere. There is good , bad , hope, negativity , KFCs , Gastro pubs , good schools , bad schools like nearly everywhere else. The only absolute good thing about it is its surrounding countryside and parks - Sherwood Forest, Sherwood Pines ("Clipo forest" to many a native) Rufford Park (superb example of a council run park) , Clumber Park , Newstead Abbey
    Indeed. I was thinking exactly that. I'd rather live in Mansfield. Been for many a spin on a bike round "Clipo", Clumber, and Sherwood.

    If you prefer your greenery manicured then Sherwood Forest GC and Nottingham (Hollinwell) are two of the finest courses in the country, and definitely upmarket.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    I have only been to Mansfield once. But it struck me as pretty run of the mill, rather than anything awful. The centre of town around the market seemed pretty nice.

  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,816
    AlistairM said:

    Cookie said:

    TimT said:

    Cookie said:

    I kinda agree with the government's report today.

    I've said on here many times that my life outcomes were determined by

    1) The profession of my father and grandparents

    2) Where I lived

    3) The schools my parents chose (and paid for)

    To lump me in some black kid on sink estate in London who goes to a bog standard comprehensive because we're in the catch all term BAME is ridiculous.

    Obviously my talents helped a lot as well, as Harrow shows just because your parents pay huge school fees it still doesn't help if you're thick as pig poo.

    Yes - I'd agree with that. Though I think even more important is 4) the stability of your family background.
    I can think of plenty of people who have overcome disadvantages in category 1, if 2, 3 and especially 4 have been in in place.

    The headstart I had in life over my Pakistani-heritage schoolfriend* who also had a comfortable middle class upbringing in a comfortable and stable middle class family and attended a comfortable middle class school in a comfortable middle class suburb in almost non-existent, compared to the headstart we both have over my white colleague who grew up in Skelmersdale and went to a school where any attempt to learn resulted in ostracisation and/or actual violence.

    *his father, on the other hand, who managed to achieve this comfortable middle class base after arriving in the country as an illegal immigrant and starting his own business, had to overcome rather more.
    Yes, 4 and the fact they took an interest in my education.

    Made sure I did all the right things, spent time to ensure I did as well.

    Also told me that if I worked hard in my education I’d be able to choose a great career and earn serious wonga so I can do and buy whatever I wanted.

    I think middle class parents are very pushy in that regards.

    At my school I wasn’t the only child whose parents saw anything other than an A as a failure.
    I got 4 As and and E at A Level. My father's reaction? "What happened with the E?" [Advanced Maths - took Maths a year early, lost interest, thought I could wing it without doing the work, was wrong].
    I got 7 As and a D at GCSE. The D was for art.
    Now I'm not great at art, but I was always mildly disappointed that I was rated one of the three worst in the year. Which I didn't think was fair.
    I've recently found out, 25 years later, that the issue was that my art teacher - who effectively marks these things - suspected my mum was doing my work for me, because my output was wildly inconsistent. She wasn't - I was just wildly inconsistent.
    This minor disappointment has had no impact on my life whatsoever.
    My Mum always did my art homework for me. Although I dropped art as soon as I could and didn't get anywhere near GCSE. I don't think this has caused me a problem in life.
    I was good at drawing curtains - nothing else. Still to this day cannot understand how people can draw or paint detailed pictures from imagination
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821


    I was good at drawing curtains - nothing else. Still to this day cannot understand how people can draw or paint detailed pictures from imagination

    Your school pioneered avant-garde installation art where you expressed your inner self by drawing the curtains?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547

    Andy_JS said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    100,000 people live in the Mansfield constituency. Just dismissing like this isn't going to be a successful electoral strategy.
    Who said it was? I was simply pointing out what a ridiculous comment the OP made. Why would we want more Mansfields than Putneys? Absolutely bizarre thing to say.
    Thanks. When you live in a northern factory town the only thing against Mansfield is that it is too far south; but its proximity to Lincolnshire is yet another plus point.

    As for Putney, wrong side of the Thames. And is your irony filter switched to 'Naive Literalist Only'?

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,204
    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    What are quite amazing are the fiercely held views of Centrists that

    (a) Starmer is doing a really good job because he’s not quite as bad as Corbyn, &

    (b) Boris is “just going through a lucky vaccine bounce period” despite having taken over a party in supply and confidence w the DUP, 3rd or 4th in the polls on circa 20%, won an 80 seat majority, and got Sir Keir’s fans celebrating when the Tories don’t make 40% in a poll!

    How can people be so blind?

    Because for some people - especially self-described centrists - Boris causes a logic error in their brain that makes rational evaluation of his electoral appeal impossible. He could win again in 2024 and 2029, and they'd still underestimate him. 'Oh, he just got lucky again', 'The media conspired against our immensely boring candidate', 'That 10-point bounce just came out of nowhere'...
    I don't underestimate him. He is electoral gold. The most prescient post I have ever written on here was my early call of the Con landslide with 3 big reasons highlighted - one of them being the star power of Brand "Boris".
    It's as hard to see Johnson losing an election as it is as hard to imagine Blair ever losing one (and Clinton).

    I must admit that I dislike these charisma type leaders because I think they are dangerous in that the electorate is too easily fooled by them.

    I wonder whether we should, like the States, have a two-term maximum tenure?
    Totally agree. And, yes, interesting idea. I can't actually see a downside to it.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,238

    felix said:

    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
    You're never gonna get it are you? Sorry.
    You do realise that that I'm originally from that area? No, probably you don't...

    The patronising tone among PBers on these places makes me sick – they are not great places, most ambitious people leave them. The answer is not to lionise them, but to work out how to improve them.
    It's a tricky one.

    I'm from one of the south coast towns that looks and feels a lot more northern than it is. I've still got family there, and I'm very fond of them and the town. But there's lots of stuff that I've enjoyed doing in my life that I simply couldn't have done if I had stayed there.

    And the problem with the "somewhere" theory of life is that nobody has really worked out how to substantially improve the quality of smalltown-somewhere life without making it into a different place. More cosmopolitan. More like that there London. More civic pride and a less tatty public realm will help, but they're not a complete answer. Some of the things that will make towns attractive those prone to moving away will destroy the somewhere-ness that many people crave.

    I don't know what the answer to that one is, which is a shame, because it's important.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    There's some interesting stuff in this article in The Times (£):

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-decision-on-astrazeneca-jab-is-over-reaction-ps82mkgtl

    It points out that the potential logical flaw in saying 'we have found a small but unusual increase in one particular rare medical condition' amongst those vaccinated. The potential flaw is that, in any large-scale vaccination or drug programme, if you look for every possible combination of rare events, you can expect by chance to find a cluster of some rare event out of the thousands of possible ones. So the statistical question you should be asking isn't 'What is the chance of getting a cluster of this particular type of serious rare event?', it is 'What is the chance of getting a cluster of any one of many possible types of serious rare event?'

    Of course, if you have a scientific reason to expect this particular kind of rare event to be associated with the vaccine, that alters the picture. There has been a paper from the Paul Ehrlich Institute proposing a possible mechanism for the link, which may be why the German regulators have reacted as they have. But in the absence of corroborating data from the UK, it looks pretty tenuous.

    Once again, I'm not convinced that the rate of incidence of this is higher than the expected background rate for women of childbearing age. Their justification is that the rate is 10x the normal rate for the general population but if we look at the rate of blood clots for the specifically effected group (women between 18 and 55) their rate is around 7x higher for these specific types of blood clots than it is in the wider population. Once you control for variations on who is getting the jab and age properly I'm unconvinced that there would be a discernable difference, at least nowhere near statistical significance.

    There just seems to be a bit of a breakdown in scientific process at the moment wrt this specific vaccine. I do wonder whether there has been some specific targeting on social media by state actors in China and Russia of the regulators and government officials in charge. The main winners from this are Russia and China who are now going to offer to fill the gap in Europe left by up to 400m AZ doses sitting on the shelf.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,204
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    Maybe. But I find that rather unambitious.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822
    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    MaxPB said:


    Once again, I'm not convinced that the rate of incidence of this is higher than the expected background rate for women of childbearing age. Their justification is that the rate is 10x the normal rate for the general population but if we look at the rate of blood clots for the specifically effected group (women between 18 and 55) their rate is around 7x higher for these specific types of blood clots than it is in the wider population. Once you control for variations on who is getting the jab and age properly I'm unconvinced that there would be a discernable difference, at least nowhere near statistical significance.

    There just seems to be a bit of a breakdown in scientific process at the moment wrt this specific vaccine. I do wonder whether there has been some specific targeting on social media by state actors in China and Russia of the regulators and government officials in charge. The main winners from this are Russia and China who are now going to offer to fill the gap in Europe left by up to 400m AZ doses sitting on the shelf.

    It's particularly irrational to switch from AZ to Sputnik on the basis of this worry, since the two vaccines work in very similar ways and thus, if there really is any effect, it probably applies just as much to Sputnik (and you won't find out until you've dished it out in millions).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,204
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    I think Sir Keir’s fans have given up on him now to be honest - they no longer talk of him winning, but instead compare his current bad polling to Corbyn’s worst poll or polls when Corbyn had left and the leadership race was being run.

    “Maybe he might get us back to were we were under Miliband or Brown” kind of talk.
    I'm not a fan but this is not the case. Other than panickers on the Labour side and trollers on your side the feeling is the GE is 3 years away and it's all to play for.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,212
    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    edited March 2021

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    I have only been to Mansfield once. But it struck me as pretty run of the mill, rather than anything awful. The centre of town around the market seemed pretty nice.

    I've been to Mansfield. I was getting a lift down south with a college friend and he had to stop off there to see some other college friends of his from there (who'd left before I started). Maybe the town as a whole is OK, but the area where they lived was one of the grimmest places I've ever seen, and I lived in Medway for several years. I've seen a couple of worse places here in the US, but nowhere worse in the UK.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Cookie said:

    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.

    Deaths per week are lower than the pre Covid 5 year average now. They would be I guess with the amount of lockdown we have had, combined with the vaccine.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited March 2021
    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all, challenging header. Just a tough read. :neutral:

    The problem for Labour (as others have said) is that their core support (the Enlightened) are heavily concentrated in the big cities and prestige university towns, which is ridiculously inefficient when it comes to translating votes into seats in our FPTP electoral system. The obvious answer - indeed the only answer - is for the Enlightened to start spreading themselves around the country. It's time for us to go and live in more primitive places and explain to the natives how their interests would be served by a more egalitarian society. Preach the word. Just like the missionaries of old.

    A massive win/win accrues from this development. Firstly, a goodly proportion of the natives will likely be convinced by our case if we are making it casually, face to face and in situ, fellow residents who they've gotten to know and like, rather than lecturing from on high on CH4 news or in the columns of the Guardian. Imagine the natives mixing unselfconsciously with the Enlightened on a regular basis as they go about their daily lives. Down the local, in the supermarket, hanging around on street corners, they keep bumping into these progressive types, and they find people who are just nice and pleasant and normal like they are, no difference whatsoever except for being a teeny bit more intelligent and educated, which is no crime and why should it be. Imagine countless desultory and friendly conversations taking place about this & that, the football, the weather, the price of fish, but with every now and again one of the participants slipping in something thought provoking about how the country could be reformed in the economic interests of working people. It will have an effect. How could it not.

    But let's say it doesn't. Let's say the natives remain impervious to logical argument and stick to their Tory voting ways. Perhaps it even backfires and they get well pissed off with the Enlightened and wish they would fuck off back to where they came from. Point is, it doesn't matter. Conversions are merely the icing on the cake. Because due to the Diaspora there is now a large contingent of progressives on the electoral roll in these godforsaken little towns and villages and they will be voting Labour, bringing lots of Conservative seats into play whilst at the same time not taking risks with Labour seats, since there will still be safe majorities in the places they have abandoned.

    You might think I'm joking with this but I'm not. I'm perfectly serious. This is a demographic problem and therefore it requires a demographic solution.

    Progressives of Britain Unite and log onto RightMove!
    You have nothing to lose but your Tory governments!

    It's called RightMove for a reason. You need to set up a new site, called LeftMove.

    Also when you referred to "godforsaken little towns and villages" you forgot to describe them as "deplorable-filled".
    Yes, LEFTmove. Absolutely. :smile:

    And sorry, I posted the wrong draft, tt was meant to say "sweet" little towns and villages. We have to get away from the sneery tone.
    I’ve told you how to fix Labour. Forget Wokery and ID politics. Forget transgender toilets.

    Go back to old fashioned socialism with an authoritarian tinge. Community pride. Clean streets. Tough on crime. Tough on borders because that’s the law. Taxes might go up but it means safer cities.

    You can sell mild socialism if you wrap it in a patriotic bow and with practical policies that will make daily life better. Ignore the bloody Guardian

    Blair got this
    I think Sir Keir’s fans have given up on him now to be honest - they no longer talk of him winning, but instead compare his current bad polling to Corbyn’s worst poll or polls when Corbyn had left and the leadership race was being run.

    “Maybe he might get us back to were we were under Miliband or Brown” kind of talk.
    I'm not a fan but this is not the case. Other than panickers on the Labour side and trollers on your side the feeling is the GE is 3 years away and it's all to play for.
    I agree that it is three years away
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,238

    MaxPB said:


    Once again, I'm not convinced that the rate of incidence of this is higher than the expected background rate for women of childbearing age. Their justification is that the rate is 10x the normal rate for the general population but if we look at the rate of blood clots for the specifically effected group (women between 18 and 55) their rate is around 7x higher for these specific types of blood clots than it is in the wider population. Once you control for variations on who is getting the jab and age properly I'm unconvinced that there would be a discernable difference, at least nowhere near statistical significance.

    There just seems to be a bit of a breakdown in scientific process at the moment wrt this specific vaccine. I do wonder whether there has been some specific targeting on social media by state actors in China and Russia of the regulators and government officials in charge. The main winners from this are Russia and China who are now going to offer to fill the gap in Europe left by up to 400m AZ doses sitting on the shelf.

    It's particularly irrational to switch from AZ to Sputnik on the basis of this worry, since the two vaccines work in very similar ways and thus, if there really is any effect, it probably applies just as much to Sputnik (and you won't find out until you've dished it out in millions).
    Seems unlikely, anyway. After all, the hundreds of millions of AZ doses don't actually exist yet (see here, passim ad nauseum), and the current Europlan looks like it's dominated by Pfizer and J+J.

    The safety doubts might be being amplified by Russian and Chinese trolling; the "Merkel and Macron are going to buy Sputnik" surely falls into that category.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,100
    edited March 2021
    The behaviour of some EU states is utterly reprehensable and inexcusable as they put their citizens at risk of serious illness and even death

    Not only that, by boycotting the appeal for a worldwide future pandemic policy they are now standing fair and square v the ROW

    This is not going to end well for the EU or the leaders of its nations but more so their electorates
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477
    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
    I am not sure what point you're trying to make here. Antibiotics are of course hugely harmful to the gut microbiome, but they are still used extremely widely in medicine (far too widely) because the ends of destroying the problem are seen to justify the means. We also frequently use antimicrobial substances topically to treat all sorts of infections. Are you seriously saying we should use these for athlete's foot but not potentially to stop a case of Covid in its tracks - before the body is exposed to manifold other medical interventions that are considerably worse? Frankly I think this is sour grapes after you rubbished the idea of such treatments when I raised it, and I think it makes you look rather silly.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    https://twitter.com/AngryScotland/status/1377244655474118656?s=20

    Do they mean 'Briton'?
  • TimT said:

    Cookie said:

    I kinda agree with the government's report today.

    I've said on here many times that my life outcomes were determined by

    1) The profession of my father and grandparents

    2) Where I lived

    3) The schools my parents chose (and paid for)

    To lump me in some black kid on sink estate in London who goes to a bog standard comprehensive because we're in the catch all term BAME is ridiculous.

    Obviously my talents helped a lot as well, as Harrow shows just because your parents pay huge school fees it still doesn't help if you're thick as pig poo.

    Yes - I'd agree with that. Though I think even more important is 4) the stability of your family background.
    I can think of plenty of people who have overcome disadvantages in category 1, if 2, 3 and especially 4 have been in in place.

    The headstart I had in life over my Pakistani-heritage schoolfriend* who also had a comfortable middle class upbringing in a comfortable and stable middle class family and attended a comfortable middle class school in a comfortable middle class suburb in almost non-existent, compared to the headstart we both have over my white colleague who grew up in Skelmersdale and went to a school where any attempt to learn resulted in ostracisation and/or actual violence.

    *his father, on the other hand, who managed to achieve this comfortable middle class base after arriving in the country as an illegal immigrant and starting his own business, had to overcome rather more.
    Yes, 4 and the fact they took an interest in my education.

    Made sure I did all the right things, spent time to ensure I did as well.

    Also told me that if I worked hard in my education I’d be able to choose a great career and earn serious wonga so I can do and buy whatever I wanted.

    I think middle class parents are very pushy in that regards.

    At my school I wasn’t the only child whose parents saw anything other than an A as a failure.
    I got 4 As and and E at A Level. My father's reaction? "What happened with the E?" [Advanced Maths - took Maths a year early, lost interest, thought I could wing it without doing the work, was wrong].
    I once got a D in a maths tests in Year 9, a test which had been designed by our school's maths department.

    I got all the answers right, but my I was downgraded to a D because I had failed to show any workings.

    I had pointed out that on the exam paper it didn't say show your workings, which amused my maths teacher and who was also head of the department, he said well spotted, and upgraded me to an A, and gave me a bit of advice which I've obviously heeded, which was, 'nobody likes a smug bastard.'

    He relayed this story at parents evening and my father was furious.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    If, as is commonly assumed, the EU area's opposition to the AZ vaccine is on political rather than medical grounds, there is a rather big question to be answered as to why concerns are being driven entirely by nation states and opposed by the actual EU body with responsibility in the relevant area. Surely it should be the other way round?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477

    The most popular credo on PB is authoritarianism of both left and right, as we have seen in spades recently. Sandy Rentool posts one unpleasantly authoritarian post per day, usually around 11pm, then goes to bed with a hasty "night all" before anyone can challenge him.

    If you switched his initials around he would be called Randy Sentool, which is amusing (I think).
    See also the E-creaming Seagulls.
    I like Thillip Phompson. He sounds like a Guardian columnist.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    The most popular credo on PB is authoritarianism of both left and right, as we have seen in spades recently. Sandy Rentool posts one unpleasantly authoritarian post per day, usually around 11pm, then goes to bed with a hasty "night all" before anyone can challenge him.

    If you switched his initials around he would be called Randy Sentool, which is amusing (I think).
    See also the E-creaming Seagulls.
    I like Thillip Phompson. He sounds like a Guardian columnist.
    Oh thank god; I'm not the only one.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,380

    Floater said:


    Barry Sheerman MP
    @BarrySheerman
    Keir Starmer has made excellent progress in his first year as Labour leader. Steady as we go!

    Barry thought he had scheduled his tweet for tomorrow presumably

    Excellent progress seems a tad err optimistic
    From LAB being 25% behind to 4-5% seems like massive progress
    Those most vexed by Starmer on PB are posters that are unlikely ever to vote anything other than Conservative. If Starmer is so poor, aren't they better off keeping their counsel in the hope that he is not replaced by someone better?

    That said, a little opposing from the Leader of the Opposition might be nice, once in a while.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    I agree that the UK is one of the most racially tolerant places there is. There is of course a glass ceiling still to smash for 20th century immigrants and their descendants and that’s the office of PM.

    Without knowing how long Boris will rule, on the blue side: Sunak, Patel, Javid and Zahawi look a very realistic shortlist for next Tory PM at the moment, with perhaps only Gove, Hunt and Truss looking like giving them serious competition.

    Next Labour PM, well I think largely we agree it probably won’t be Starmer. Khan perhaps? But aside from him the cupboard looks a little bare for the self proclaimed party of diversity doesn’t it.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Moonshine, sounds concerning.

    As I said the other day, it should by a mile be the preeminent political issue and general talking point of the day. It might soon become so very quickly and emphatically. But we can chat about litter and race until then I suppose if it makes everyone feel happier.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,212
    .

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
    I am not sure what point you're trying to make here. Antibiotics are of course hugely harmful to the gut microbiome, but they are still used extremely widely in medicine (far too widely) because the ends of destroying the problem are seen to justify the means. We also frequently use antimicrobial substances topically to treat all sorts of infections. Are you seriously saying we should use these for athlete's foot but not potentially to stop a case of Covid in its tracks - before the body is exposed to manifold other medical interventions that are considerably worse? Frankly I think this is sour grapes after you rubbished the idea of such treatments when I raised it, and I think it makes you look rather silly.
    I was responding to the comment ...I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose... as ought to have been clear to you.
    You may think what you like.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Owner of sons bar jabbed today - aged 35
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    felix said:

    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
    You're never gonna get it are you? Sorry.
    You do realise that that I'm originally from that area? No, probably you don't...

    The patronising tone among PBers on these places makes me sick – they are not great places, most ambitious people leave them. The answer is not to lionise them, but to work out how to improve them.
    I am from just such a place myself - newsflash - Putney is not heaven! These places have a chance to improve now that they'd never get under Labour. Turing them into Putney is not what they need or want.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
    I am not sure what point you're trying to make here. Antibiotics are of course hugely harmful to the gut microbiome, but they are still used extremely widely in medicine (far too widely) because the ends of destroying the problem are seen to justify the means. We also frequently use antimicrobial substances topically to treat all sorts of infections. Are you seriously saying we should use these for athlete's foot but not potentially to stop a case of Covid in its tracks - before the body is exposed to manifold other medical interventions that are considerably worse? Frankly I think this is sour grapes after you rubbished the idea of such treatments when I raised it, and I think it makes you look rather silly.
    I was responding to the comment ...I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose... as ought to have been clear to you.
    You may think what you like.
    I apologise for being touchy.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,083
    AlistairM said:

    Apparently littering is connected to Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1377189291361763335

    Seems quite a stretch given that the crowd causing it was very young in age and they clearly voted (if they were able to 5 years ago) in a majority to Remain.

    My theory is that youngsters are used to someone else doing things for them that they don't want. As a father of 3 I fall into this trap. I think anyone caught littering should be made to do a day's litter picking.

    Or....the first reply...the fault of self serving exceptionalism...

    https://twitter.com/SEZOWT/status/1377179459397111813?s=19
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454



    I was good at drawing curtains - nothing else. Still to this day cannot understand how people can draw or paint detailed pictures from imagination

    I had a bit of a revelation when I realised some people have a much clearer mind's eye than others (aphantasia).

    It always baffled me when artists or particularly sculptors said that the picture was already on the canvas, they just need to paint it (or find it in the block of marble). The only way I could conceive of an image is to draw it myself, literally or metaphorically.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,083
    edited March 2021

    twitter.com/DarrenEuronews/status/1377264456900706313?s=20
    twitter.com/DarrenEuronews/status/1377264781351124992?s=20

    Taps mic.....sniff sniff......(EU countries banning this jab are).....WROOOOOOOOONNNNNGG.

    This whole AZN blot clot risk is based on Fake News.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,204

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587
    edited March 2021
    "European suspension of AstraZeneca vaccine WILL cause Covid deaths in Britain because it will scare people into shunning the jab over blood clot fears in young women, warn experts"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9421741/European-suspension-AstraZeneca-vaccine-cause-Covid-deaths-experts-warn.html


    'German decision on AstraZeneca jab is ‘over-reaction’"

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-decision-on-astrazeneca-jab-is-over-reaction-ps82mkgtl
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,765
    Endillion said:

    If, as is commonly assumed, the EU area's opposition to the AZ vaccine is on political rather than medical grounds, there is a rather big question to be answered as to why concerns are being driven entirely by nation states and opposed by the actual EU body with responsibility in the relevant area. Surely it should be the other way round?
    Who knows. Europe has had a collective nervous breakdown and has totally lost the plot frankly.
    People in their own countries will die because of their pigheaded idiocy.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822

    felix said:

    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
    You're never gonna get it are you? Sorry.
    You do realise that that I'm originally from that area? No, probably you don't...

    The patronising tone among PBers on these places makes me sick – they are not great places, most ambitious people leave them. The answer is not to lionise them, but to work out how to improve them.
    It's a tricky one.

    I'm from one of the south coast towns that looks and feels a lot more northern than it is. I've still got family there, and I'm very fond of them and the town. But there's lots of stuff that I've enjoyed doing in my life that I simply couldn't have done if I had stayed there.

    And the problem with the "somewhere" theory of life is that nobody has really worked out how to substantially improve the quality of smalltown-somewhere life without making it into a different place. More cosmopolitan. More like that there London. More civic pride and a less tatty public realm will help, but they're not a complete answer. Some of the things that will make towns attractive those prone to moving away will destroy the somewhere-ness that many people crave.

    I don't know what the answer to that one is, which is a shame, because it's important.
    Life in this small town (in reality, a large suburb) is pretty good right now.
    I'm working from home. So I spend most of my working week here - it's more of a community, less of a dormitory. The local shops are doing well because the workers-from-home are shopping in them. I walk down to the butchers (where I never shopped when I commuted, because I was at work in a big city while it was open) and see three people I know on my journey. I speak to my neighbours. There is space here, and time.
    We could do more to improve the urban realm. The place could be cleaner. But actually, some of the rebalancing is happening by itself. The primary advantage of the city was proximity to employment, which the small towns couldn't provide in anything like such abundance. With that advantage partially eroded, the small town has more to offer.
    Now, I do want to get back to the office. But in most future scenarios, I, along with most people, will be spending more time in my home town and less in the city where my work is. This can't help but be good for the small towns (and, regrettably, bad for the cities). And it will strengthen the often-claimed quality of a sense of community.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    "BAME" has definitely died a death in the last week or so.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,587
    Cookie said:

    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.

    Hang on — aren't deaths supposed to be within the last 28 days?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,234
    edited March 2021

    The point is to improve places like Mansfield, make them wealthier, more ambitious and retain more young people and skills. I.e. level them up towards places like Putney.

    Lionising them as some sort of heaven is ridiculous.

    I wen to school in Mansfield and was brought up near it . It is not as extreme in social depravation, lack of ambition or grimness as it is sometime portrayed. then again it is not full of true salt of the earth working class either who are only let down by metro type people elsewhere. There is good , bad , hope, negativity , KFCs , Gastro pubs , good schools , bad schools like nearly everywhere else. The only absolute good thing about it is its surrounding countryside and parks - Sherwood Forest, Sherwood Pines ("Clipo forest" to many a native) Rufford Park (superb example of a council run park) , Clumber Park , Newstead Abbey
    Indeed. I was thinking exactly that. I'd rather live in Mansfield. Been for many a spin on a bike round "Clipo", Clumber, and Sherwood.

    If you prefer your greenery manicured then Sherwood Forest GC and Nottingham (Hollinwell) are two of the finest courses in the country, and definitely upmarket.
    These days the closest park to Mansfield centre even has a Court for playing Petanque ... they've gone all French.

    I'll give you that the Town Centre needs some serious investment. Starting to happen in small ways, but should have been at least 15 years ago. It needs to find a mojo.

    As I say, the Chesterfield comparison is instructive.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,083
    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822
    Scott_xP said:
    Good. At least someone was standing up against the needless clamour for ineffective and needless lockdowns.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,750

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
    I am not sure what point you're trying to make here. Antibiotics are of course hugely harmful to the gut microbiome, but they are still used extremely widely in medicine (far too widely) because the ends of destroying the problem are seen to justify the means. We also frequently use antimicrobial substances topically to treat all sorts of infections. Are you seriously saying we should use these for athlete's foot but not potentially to stop a case of Covid in its tracks - before the body is exposed to manifold other medical interventions that are considerably worse? Frankly I think this is sour grapes after you rubbished the idea of such treatments when I raised it, and I think it makes you look rather silly.
    I was responding to the comment ...I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose... as ought to have been clear to you.
    You may think what you like.
    I apologise for being touchy.
    Coming back to this, my comment was against the apparent idea of regular, mass use while the pandemic persists (unless I misunderstood the article). I can see the utility in short term use among, say, close contacts of an infected person or - particularly - immediately after a positive test. Benefits for the latter likely outweigh the possible harms, particularly in more vulnerable groups. As, indeed, the benefits of antibiotics are clear in very many cases, despite the potential downsides.

    On antibiotics, to NigelB, I had a similar experience with my partner - oral antibiotics, which aparently led (could of course have been coincidence, but onset was fairly sudden and close in time) to a number of digestive problems with months of investigations including endoscopies before, essentially, nothing was found. It did gradually resolve itself over a number of years. Since discovered that topical antibiotics are available for the same issue and - obviously - less likely to have this negative impact.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    Endillion said:

    If, as is commonly assumed, the EU area's opposition to the AZ vaccine is on political rather than medical grounds, there is a rather big question to be answered as to why concerns are being driven entirely by nation states and opposed by the actual EU body with responsibility in the relevant area. Surely it should be the other way round?
    It has become quite complex. The EMA is focused solely on the science and is clear the vaccine is safe. The EU Commission has become virulently anti-British because of both Brexit and the vaccine shambles. Individual countries in Europe vary. Some are caught up in the Commission think - France certainly and probably Germany to a degree. But both they and some others have got into a total mess through the trashing of AZN - making their already vaccine sceptic populations more so. The focus on AZN suggests a political anti-British motive is added to the mix because they have all singularly failed to question other vaccines which actually mostly have similar 'issues'. The most damaging thing for me living in Spain is that they have now in their 4th or 5th policy change agreed to give AZN to over 65s but only if they are essential workers! I am 66! I am starting to take it personally. Spain has at least said today that from mid April they will begin vaccinating 65-85 year olds subject to available vaccines. On the plus side it's warm and sunny here - but then it pretty much always is. :smiley:
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,234

    AlistairM said:

    Apparently littering is connected to Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1377189291361763335

    Seems quite a stretch given that the crowd causing it was very young in age and they clearly voted (if they were able to 5 years ago) in a majority to Remain.

    My theory is that youngsters are used to someone else doing things for them that they don't want. As a father of 3 I fall into this trap. I think anyone caught littering should be made to do a day's litter picking.

    Or....the first reply...the fault of self serving exceptionalism...

    https://twitter.com/SEZOWT/status/1377179459397111813?s=19
    Which is just the same as Milltown Park in Dublin. Silly old oaf.



  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Floater said:


    Barry Sheerman MP
    @BarrySheerman
    Keir Starmer has made excellent progress in his first year as Labour leader. Steady as we go!

    Barry thought he had scheduled his tweet for tomorrow presumably

    Excellent progress seems a tad err optimistic
    From LAB being 25% behind to 4-5% seems like massive progress
    Those most vexed by Starmer on PB are posters that are unlikely ever to vote anything other than Conservative. If Starmer is so poor, aren't they better off keeping their counsel in the hope that he is not replaced by someone better?

    That said, a little opposing from the Leader of the Opposition might be nice, once in a while.
    It would also help the debate if we had a little more honesty - the current polling does not suggest that Labour are 4-5% behind.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Andy_JS said:

    Cookie said:

    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.

    Hang on — aren't deaths supposed to be within the last 28 days?
    Within 28 days of a positive test. This death happened a year ago, with a positive test shortly before, but we are only finding out about it now, due to reporting delays. Presumably a record got "lost" somewhere in the system.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,822
    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    OK, dipping my toe in controversial waters here, but this is a genuine question - please don't splutter with indignation: but what would have been the counterfactual for the slaves transported to the West Indies? European slavers didn't capture them, they bought them. They already were slaves (as a result - I'm guessing? of small scale wars between African states). Would, as individuals, their futures have been any brighter being slaves in Africa?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Andy_JS said:

    Cookie said:

    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.

    Hang on — aren't deaths supposed to be within the last 28 days?
    No. They're supposed to be deaths within 28 days of a test.

    If someone died a week ago, and was tested 32 days ago, then that's a death within 28 days.
This discussion has been closed.