Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.
It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.
That's all the more the case with this research.
Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.
Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
That's misleading. We know that flu tends to drop during a SARS type outbreak. There may be several reasons for that but the obvious ones are 1. Face masking wearing 2. Social Distancing and 3. Lockdowns.
We're currently announcing under 100 deaths a day due to some sort of mention of covid in a 28 day period. It's frankly pointless.
They should stop all daily death announcements given the dribbling number of them (thankfully) and publish monthly excess deaths instead.
It's time to cease this scaremongering.
Disagreed completely. As deaths are driven down and out it's important people know and understand that. If you abruptly drop reporting while people are scared then people won't stop being afraid, they'll think "what are they not telling us, what are they trying to hide" instead.
Deaths are inexorably going down to zero now. Which do you think will do more to end scaremongering: deaths abruptly not being reported, or the national media reporting next to no deaths and the local media reporting there have been zero deaths locally?
I agree, but as a point of order they will never be zero - that is surely impossible under the current measure? (Death of any cause within 28 days of a positive test)
So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?
But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
Quite. twitter and its friends don't help a lot here. I have half followed bits of the media coverage. What I haven't heard/see/read is anyone who:
Has read the relevant material Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people Pays careful attention to a range of arguments Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase
The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.
Yes - that would be one purpose.
We have the following to look forward to, inevitably - a holidayer who uses a fake letter/vaccine passport to go on holiday. Gets put in jail in somewhere like Thailand and threatened with a decade behind bars. Should we chose sides on this one now, or later?
Mr. Royale, the 'denial' line is a pathetic route taken by many in this area. If you disagree you're a 'denier', as per the internalised racism that all white people have if you believe certain dingbat theories.
Mr. Flare, I agree entirely. As an aside, I don't have a smartphone. I don't want one to install a Big Brother app.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We're around 40 miles NE of London. BBC forecasters give a 20% chance of sleet showers at 6am on Monday. Nothing after that; sunny intervals, but cold.
Is that an actual person, or an ap? Ap's only take raw model data so none should be trusted in isolation.
So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?
But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
Quite. twitter and its friends don't help a lot here. I have half followed bits of the media coverage. What I haven't heard/see/read is anyone who:
Has read the relevant material Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people Pays careful attention to a range of arguments Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
Can anyone help?
I believe you need an alternate reality for that. Sad, isn't it?
A single glance at the electoral map of Ukraine suggests that a certain amount of disagreement internally as to who they are and where they belong may be likely, and that the Russians may be interested in quite a bit of it.
I don't suppose odds are offered on a good number of the seats.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We're around 40 miles NE of London. BBC forecasters give a 20% chance of sleet showers at 6am on Monday. Nothing after that; sunny intervals, but cold.
Is that an actual person, or an ap? Ap's only take raw model data so none should be trusted in isolation.
So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?
But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
Quite. twitter and its friends don't help a lot here. I have half followed bits of the media coverage. What I haven't heard/see/read is anyone who:
Has read the relevant material Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people Pays careful attention to a range of arguments Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
Can anyone help?
Says someone who I assume also hasn't read the relevant material...
You can read the key findings of the report in The Times here, including a summary of some of the key evidence datasets.
I think the key issue here is scope creep of the words "institutional" or "structural" racism. This report, and I think most people, take that to mean where a system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities whereas I think others use it to mean racism is still a factor in their everyday lives (the "nod", the "nudge", the "glare", the hoverring security guard etc).
If you think saying there's no evidence for the former is really you saying the latter doesn't exist then you're going to be pissed off but that's not what this report says. It is merely critical of the current trend for *every* disparity in outcome (I'm looking at you, BBC, as a loudhailer for this) to be explained directly by racism as a catch-all explanation, which isn't supported by the evidence:
"Britain is no longer a country where the system is “deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities” and very few inequalities are directly to do with race, a major review of racial disparities has concluded.
The review, carried out by a panel of ten commissioners who were appointed by the government last year at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, said it found no evidence of “institutional racism” in the UK and criticised the “confusing” way in which the term has been applied.
But it added that it did not deny that racism was a “real force” in the UK that needed to be taken seriously."
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We're around 40 miles NE of London. BBC forecasters give a 20% chance of sleet showers at 6am on Monday. Nothing after that; sunny intervals, but cold.
Good news for the Govt. is that it will stop vast numbers of people heading out to the beach over Easter.
Bad news is instead, they'll pop round to see their mates - indoors....
If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase
The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.
Yes - that would be one purpose.
We have the following to look forward to, inevitably - a holidayer who uses a fake letter/vaccine passport to go on holiday. Gets put in jail in somewhere like Thailand and threatened with a decade behind bars. Should we chose sides on this one now, or later?
Fake corovirus test certificates is already very much a problem.
So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?
But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
Quite. twitter and its friends don't help a lot here. I have half followed bits of the media coverage. What I haven't heard/see/read is anyone who:
Has read the relevant material Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people Pays careful attention to a range of arguments Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
Can anyone help?
I believe you need an alternate reality for that. Sad, isn't it?
It used to be the job of The Times and the BBC to dig them out and give them an airing.
The BBC's interpretation of non bias tends to mean that it's OK to interview two ignorant polemicists with preordained knee jerk reactions as long as they are ignorant on opposite sides.
You can read the key findings of the report in The Times here, including a summary of some of the key evidence datasets.
I think the key issue here is scope creep of the words "institutional" or "structural" racism. This report, and I think most people, take that to mean where a system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities whereas I think others use it to mean racism is still a factor in their everyday lives (the "nod", the "nudge", the "glare", the hoverring security guard etc).
If you think saying there's no evidence for the former is really you saying the latter doesn't exist then you're going to be pissed off but that's not what this report says. It is merely critical of the current trend for *every* disparity in outcome (I'm looking at you, BBC, as a loudhailer for this) to be explained directly by racism as a catch-all explanation, which isn't supported by the evidence:
"Britain is no longer a country where the system is “deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities” and very few inequalities are directly to do with race, a major review of racial disparities has concluded.
The review, carried out by a panel of ten commissioners who were appointed by the government last year at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, said it found no evidence of “institutional racism” in the UK and criticised the “confusing” way in which the term has been applied.
But it added that it did not deny that racism was a “real force” in the UK that needed to be taken seriously."
If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase
The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.
Absolutely. And it is not cynical, its smart.
Agreed. Far better than the government trying foist vaccines on a reluctant younger cohort.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
Whichever ‘forecast’ you saw was wrong, as I said it would be. There are umpteen apps out there that just use raw data, take your pick, but they are not ‘forecasts’ as such.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?
But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
Quite. twitter and its friends don't help a lot here. I have half followed bits of the media coverage. What I haven't heard/see/read is anyone who:
Has read the relevant material Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people Pays careful attention to a range of arguments Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
Can anyone help?
Says someone who I assume also hasn't read the relevant material...
I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.
Now they aren't.
Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'
The whole thing has become bloody silly.
Things are going to be very bad for a long time, certainly many years. Many more people are going to be permanently debilitated by long Covid and a lot of them are going to die prematurely. It is not entirely clear that vaccination will prevent this completely. Your odds of not getting Covid are significantly improved and your risk of dying becomes very remote but that does not mean that this virus cannot do damage to a range of organs.
I want our society back to normal. I want a hair cut. To go to the pub with my pals. To go to restaurants and cafes. Even to visit the odd shop. I completely agree that we should be pushing forward with all of this. If vaccine passports facilitate that change back to normal, give more confidence, make opening up easier to insure, for example, then I am on. Let's get this done.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
I think any vaccine passport needs to be non discriminatory. This means it can't be brought in till after all adults have been offered a vaccination and medically exempt/non-recommended people (Not non choosing) should be able to enter premises at their own risk; to be honest anyone medically exempt from vaccination is likely at a higher risk than the general public so will be cautious anyway.
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase
The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.
Absolutely. And it is not cynical, its smart.
Agreed. Far better than the government trying foist vaccines on a reluctant younger cohort.
Nope - it's arrogant because we are talking about restricting access when people have not yet had a chance to get a vaccination.
Passports are a plausible idea (note not a good idea as we have a habit of scope creep whenever these ideas appear in the UK) if and when everyone has had the chance to be properly vaccinated. But that isn't now that is September at the earliest.
And then I would still say no as it the scope and rules will change and they would be reimplemented every time a variation appears and x% have been vaccinated.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
Whichever ‘forecast’ you saw was wrong, as I said it would be. There are umpteen apps out there that just use raw data, take your pick, but they are not ‘forecasts’ as such.
I do not use apps
I watch the met Office weather forecasts on Sky and BBC
And I would respectively suggest they are more knowledgeable than yourself on this subject
Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.
I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
Sure that will be a nice little earner for GP's , they will want £50 a head or suchlike to give you a sheet of paper.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We're around 40 miles NE of London. BBC forecasters give a 20% chance of sleet showers at 6am on Monday. Nothing after that; sunny intervals, but cold.
Is that an actual person, or an ap? Ap's only take raw model data so none should be trusted in isolation.
It's the forecast page on bbc.co.uk.
Probably raw data based then. Always good to see what the humans say about the forecast too.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
If the met office have specifically said London then they are far more likely to know than you do
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,
Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.
I just don't see the inconsistency. Vaccination is such a good thing we want more of it. We want to encourage groups in our society who have been more resistant to comply. We want to incentivise them to comply.
So far as opening up is concerned there are 2 different aspects. Firstly there is the criminal law. It will no longer apply. Secondly there is public confidence and the willingness of insurers to take on risk. For the latter vaccine passports clearly have a role.
I am not saying that they should be compulsory but I am saying that if people or businesses want to restrict their services to those who have them that is absolutely fair enough.
That approach is fine but offer everyone the jab first before trying to work out ways to beat the refuseniks over the head. Take-up in younger cohorts may not be quite as high as the oldesr cohorts but still willing to bet it is much higher than the Government may dare have dreamed it would be.
Why create the bureaucracy of the system without yet having a clear idea of exactly how many people are not going to take the vaccine to begin with?
I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.
Now they aren't.
Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'
The whole thing has become bloody silly.
Things are going to be very bad for a long time, certainly many years. Many more people are going to be permanently debilitated by long Covid and a lot of them are going to die prematurely. It is not entirely clear that vaccination will prevent this completely. Your odds of not getting Covid are significantly improved and your risk of dying becomes very remote but that does not mean that this virus cannot do damage to a range of organs.
I want our society back to normal. I want a hair cut. To go to the pub with my pals. To go to restaurants and cafes. Even to visit the odd shop. I completely agree that we should be pushing forward with all of this. If vaccine passports facilitate that change back to normal, give more confidence, make opening up easier to insure, for example, then I am on. Let's get this done.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
I think any vaccine passport needs to be non discriminatory. This means it can't be brought in till after all adults have been offered a vaccination and medically exempt/non-recommended people (Not non choosing) should be able to enter premises at their own risk; to be honest anyone medically exempt from vaccination is likely at a higher risk than the general public so will be cautious anyway.
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
If those conditions are satisfied the passport isn't needed.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
Do we have data on whether a vaccine prevents long-covid? That could be key.
However on group 2 spreading the infection and prolonging the situation — they're going to do that anyway. People who are very opposed to vaccinations are unlikely to get vaccinated in any case.
I don't have a problem with businesses requesting proof of vaccine, for whatever reason, but I don't think it should be mandatory by government decree.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
Do we have data on whether a vaccine prevents long-covid? That could be key.
However on group 2 spreading the infection and prolonging the situation — they're going to do that anyway. People who are very opposed to vaccinations are unlikely to get vaccinated in any case.
I don't have a problem with businesses requesting proof of vaccine, for whatever reason, but I don't think it should be mandatory by government decree.
Depends on what long covid is. There seems to be a spectrum of conditions - some a bit like chronic fatigue syndrome, possibly with little obvious physical damage, all the way to those with obvious physical damage such as nascent diabetes, CV issues etc. You would expect the vaccine to prevent a lot of such harm.
I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.
Now they aren't.
Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'
The whole thing has become bloody silly.
.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
I think any vaccine passport needs to be non discriminatory. This means it can't be brought in till after all adults have been offered a vaccination and medically exempt/non-recommended people (Not non choosing) should be able to enter premises at their own risk; to be honest anyone medically exempt from vaccination is likely at a higher risk than the general public so will be cautious anyway.
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
I don't see the point in a world where we've vaccinated 90%+ of the population and the virus is wholly suppressed. It will be a bureaucratic nightmare for pubs who will either have to put a man on the door, or check credentials every time someone orders a pint. Once the news stories start rolling in about how ludicrous that is - with some people's mates turned away because their phone has died, or they've left their papers at home, and some other crowded wet pubs closing as a result - it will be become unpopular in practice very quickly.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
Scope creep but then again you have never seen the risk of that which is why you were happy for Dog Wardens to be able to access my criminal record (picking up one of the worst examples from the previous attempt to create an ID card).
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
Google also says snow.
Ain’t gonna happen.
Google forecasts are rubbish.
WeatherPro, Weathercast or look at the models.
I totally agree, but there is a non zero chance of a snow shower in London on Monday.
I specified an area NE of London. I suggest that if the forecast is for 'sleet' then at some point during a sleet shower it might appear tnat there's only snow. But weather forecasting, although better than it was, isn't at, for example, postcode level (in the sense of AA1 1AA) isn't yet exact. Good, better than it was, admittedly.
Edit, BBC site has now dropped the likelihood of sleet to below 20%. So would appear it's regularly updated.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
Whichever ‘forecast’ you saw was wrong, as I said it would be. There are umpteen apps out there that just use raw data, take your pick, but they are not ‘forecasts’ as such.
I do not use apps
I watch the met Office weather forecasts on Sky and BBC
And I would respectively suggest they are more knowledgeable than yourself on this subject
The Met Office do not provide the BBC forecast. The BBC now how have a contract with Meteogroup instead. Not sure about Sky.
From what I can see it is entirely possible that there will be snow on Easter Monday if the precipitation is heavy enough, although specific locations are difficult at this point. GFS has the entire SE with a snow risk. It is very unlikely to lie for any length of time.
I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.
Now they aren't.
Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'
The whole thing has become bloody silly.
.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
I think any vaccine passport needs to be non discriminatory. This means it can't be brought in till after all adults have been offered a vaccination and medically exempt/non-recommended people (Not non choosing) should be able to enter premises at their own risk; to be honest anyone medically exempt from vaccination is likely at a higher risk than the general public so will be cautious anyway.
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
I don't see the point in a world where we've vaccinated 90%+ of the population and the virus is wholly suppressed. It will be a bureaucratic nightmare for pubs who will either have to put a man on the door, or check credentials every time someone orders a pint. Once the news stories start rolling in about how ludicrous that is - with some people's mates turned away because their phone has died, or they've left their papers at home, and some other crowded wet pubs closing as a result - it will be become unpopular in practice very quickly.
Check vaccines at the border, not internally.
And that's the thing - why just pubs? Would we not then need someone on the door of the cinema, of the office, of the gym, of the train, of the leisure centre and the supermarket and the library and the soft play centre and the shops and more? Why would it be limited to pubs?
As you say, bureaucratic nightmare for a situation where we already know the vast majority of people have it anyway. Waste of time.
If you want to build confidence in people to resume daily life then that comes from the government sounding the effective all-clear signal. They're not doing that yet - potentially rightly - but when they get to the June 21 stage if they are removing all legal elements then at that point they need to be shouting from the rooftops that its safe to go outside and do stuff again without endless worrying about what is now allowed and what isn't.
If they wishy-washy it with stuff like "it's fine, honest, but be careful", people are just going to hunker down forever.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I suspect more lefty than liberal.
And only some lefties to be fair. Social media exaggerates their numbers.
I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.
Now they aren't.
Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'
The whole thing has become bloody silly.
.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
I think any vaccine passport needs to be non discriminatory. This means it can't be brought in till after all adults have been offered a vaccination and medically exempt/non-recommended people (Not non choosing) should be able to enter premises at their own risk; to be honest anyone medically exempt from vaccination is likely at a higher risk than the general public so will be cautious anyway.
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
I don't see the point in a world where we've vaccinated 90%+ of the population and the virus is wholly suppressed. It will be a bureaucratic nightmare for pubs who will either have to put a man on the door, or check credentials every time someone orders a pint. Once the news stories start rolling in about how ludicrous that is - with some people's mates turned away because their phone has died, or they've left their papers at home, and some other crowded wet pubs closing as a result - it will be become unpopular in practice very quickly.
Check vaccines at the border, not internally.
And that's the thing - why just pubs? Would we not then need someone on the door of the cinema, of the office, of the gym, of the train, of the leisure centre and the supermarket and the library and the soft play centre and the shops and more? Why would it be limited to pubs?
As you say, bureaucratic nightmare for a situation where we already know the vast majority of people have it anyway. Waste of time.
If you want to build confidence in people to resume daily life then that comes from the government sounding the effective all-clear signal. They're not doing that yet - potentially rightly - but when they get to the June 21 stage if they are removing all legal elements then at that point they need to be shouting from the rooftops that its safe to go outside and do stuff again without endless worrying about what is now allowed and what isn't.
If they wishy-washy it with stuff like "it's fine, honest, but be careful", people are just going to hunker down forever.
If when we are all vaccinated the pandemic is still happening here it really doesn't matter at that point we have to re open anyway and just learn to live with it. We cannot stay locked down forever and vaccines were the only way out. If they fail we just have to accept its a disease we can do nothing about and get on with life
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
Whichever ‘forecast’ you saw was wrong, as I said it would be. There are umpteen apps out there that just use raw data, take your pick, but they are not ‘forecasts’ as such.
I do not use apps
I watch the met Office weather forecasts on Sky and BBC
And I would respectively suggest they are more knowledgeable than yourself on this subject
The most important question about the vaccine passports hasn't been discussed.
What colour will they be?
Burgundy to troll the EU?
Maybe, I mean all the Brexiteers banged on about the blue but really black passport means we're sovereign again but they ignore the fact our passports have French writing on the front of them.
Did we lose a war or something?
(I know, I know, King Richard I used 'Dieu et mon droit' when defeating the French at the Battle of Gisors but what's the excuse for 'honi soit qui mal y pense'?)
Shame is apt for having French polluting our passports.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
Google also says snow.
Ain’t gonna happen.
Google forecasts are rubbish.
WeatherPro, Weathercast or look at the models.
I totally agree, but there is a non zero chance of a snow shower in London on Monday.
There is a non-zero risk, agreed. However there is a large odds-on risk that it won't happen, despite the usual weather-based ramping and hysteria on here, which nine times out of ten is proven wrong!
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
If the met office have specifically said London then they are far more likely to know than you do
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
Do we have data on whether a vaccine prevents long-covid? That could be key.
However on group 2 spreading the infection and prolonging the situation — they're going to do that anyway. People who are very opposed to vaccinations are unlikely to get vaccinated in any case.
I don't have a problem with businesses requesting proof of vaccine, for whatever reason, but I don't think it should be mandatory by government decree.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
Out of curiosity what sort of racist experiences did you have c.2000-2001?
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I suspect more lefty than liberal.
It's an Americanism but I think the former describes your position on economic issues, and the latter on socio-cultural issues.
Strange world, where you have to share your medical history to have a pint of beer.
People in favour of all this seem to say things like a business should be free to deny admission and put this dubious claim ahead of an individual's right not to have to disclose medical information which he/she may justifiably regard as private.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
The problems are many.
Firstly what is being suggested is not just a piece of paper but an electronic tracing system. That very much is Big Brother.
Secondly it is something that will be expected to be policed by venues and pubs etc. They simply won't do that because it is impractical. You ae not talking about a few customers who look under 18 but every single customer having to be checked. Pubs certainly don't want it and its basic application is impractical.
Thirdly what do you do about the people who actually work in the venues? Are you going to insist on their vaccination? If not then the whole thing is pointless.
Any vaccine passport system designed to help venues reopen will have the exact opposite effect and cause many to shut down permanently.
So the UK much more supportive of vaccines from France or Germany than France or Germany is supportive of vaccines from the UK.
I'm sure Kamski can explain the levels of xenophobia.
This stark difference in france and germany towards uk made vaccine compared to the rest of the world must be a consequence of the political leadership in those countries.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
The problems are many.
Firstly what is being suggested is not just a piece of paper but an electronic tracing system. That very much is Big Brother.
Secondly it is something that will be expected to be policed by venues and pubs etc. They simply won't do that because it is impractical. You ae not talking about a few customers who look under 18 but every single customer having to be checked. Pubs certainly don't want it and its basic application is impractical.
Thirdly what do you do about the people who actually work in the venues? Are you going to insist on their vaccination? If not then the whole thing is pointless.
Any vaccine passport system designed to help venues reopen will have the exact opposite effect and cause many to shut down permanently.
Fourthly... it's not at all clear what is being suggested. Government appear to be rowing back on the idea already.
I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.
If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.
Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.
Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.
The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.
With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
You make a fair case, but I'd argue that group 1 will be worried about long Covid (which sounds quite severe without necessarily putting you in hospital), group 2 will spread the infection and prolong the situation by mixing with the other groups and group 3 will, as you say, be excluded. The combined effect will, perversely, to extend the period until normal life returns for most people.
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
The problems are many.
Firstly what is being suggested is not just a piece of paper but an electronic tracing system. That very much is Big Brother.
Secondly it is something that will be expected to be policed by venues and pubs etc. They simply won't do that because it is impractical. You ae not talking about a few customers who look under 18 but every single customer having to be checked. Pubs certainly don't want it and its basic application is impractical.
Thirdly what do you do about the people who actually work in the venues? Are you going to insist on their vaccination? If not then the whole thing is pointless.
Any vaccine passport system designed to help venues reopen will have the exact opposite effect and cause many to shut down permanently.
Trouble is you are trying to apply facts, principle and common sense to a situation which is being driven by largely irrational fear, a lack of logic, scientific ignorance, a government which seeks to follow mass brain-farts and a primary aim to avoid criticism.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
If the met office have specifically said London then they are far more likely to know than you do
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
If the met office have specifically said London then they are far more likely to know than you do
They haven't!
This conversation is bizarre.
Last week:
Big G: It will snow on Friday.
Anabob: Maybe on the top of Snowdon.
Big G: Nothing about Snowdon, it will snow.
Anabob: Not at low levels.
Friday arrives. No lowland snow.
Anabob: I was right. No snow.
Big G: The Met Office know more than you do.
He's just fully embraced the Thommo Dialectic. It's sign of personal growth.
Continuation from yesterday of the long thread on the WHO report into the possible origins of the virus (written by an immunologist form the Scripps Research Institute). Well worth perusing.
Snow forecast for London next Monday. I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..
It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
"A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
The forecast was for snow as it is for Easter Sunday
By the way the UK is not just London
The OP today was specifically about snow in London! FFS.
If the met office have specifically said London then they are far more likely to know than you do
They haven't!
This conversation is bizarre.
Last week:
Big G: It will snow on Friday.
Anabob: Maybe on the top of Snowdon.
Big G: Nothing about Snowdon, it will snow.
Anabob: Not at low levels.
Friday arrives. No lowland snow.
Anabob: I was right. No snow.
Big G: The Met Office know more than you do.
He's just fully embraced the Thommo Dialectic. It's sign of personal growth.
The most important question about the vaccine passports hasn't been discussed.
What colour will they be?
Burgundy to troll the EU?
Maybe, I mean all the Brexiteers banged on about the blue but really black passport means we're sovereign again but they ignore the fact our passports have French writing on the front of them.
Did we lose a war or something?
(I know, I know, King Richard I used 'Dieu et mon droit' when defeating the French at the Battle of Gisors but what's the excuse for 'honi soit qui mal y pense'?)
Shame is apt for having French polluting our passports.
Is the French something to do with the Channel Islands?
Maybe we should also have Scots and Irish Gaelic, Welsh, Doric and Geordie too? And a couple of lines of Cockney Rhyming Slang to boot.
Wrapping himself in a flag. Doesn't that normally get people agitated on here?
I don't have a problem with flags in their proper place (whether Irish or British, EU or whatever (might draw the line at those who want to fly the Red Flag!), just ministers having them in their living rooms or studies when doing Zoom calls to news channels I personally think is ridiculous.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
You can sense a lot by those most angry about it. The attempted import of the poisonous Critical Race Theory, which to sum up in a few words claims that all interactions and differences between races are due to structural racism, and that in all circumstances this is down to white supremacy. The core is not whether racism might exists or not in any given situation or organisation, but how does it manifest itself. If you cant see it, you arent looking hard enough for it.
This ideology has been creeping through our institutions over the last year.
Wonder if this resignation will be dismissed in the same way other critiques of the report have been.,
You do wonder why these people are employed in the first place, just a waste of taxpayers money assuming they dont work pro bono. But equally now the report is done so is their work, so no point them sticking around really.
Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.
I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
Sure that will be a nice little earner for GP's , they will want £50 a head or suchlike to give you a sheet of paper.
Cynical, but sadly true. And, in Scotland, that's on top of their extra 4% and £500 bung. And many of them have hardly seen a patient for months.
The trend in the construction industry is towards the use of digital twins. That is a digital copy of a physical entity. It will be used in other areas and the most useful area will be to create a digital twin of a human being using up-to-date medical info. The advantages are that you can discard irrelevant out of date info with up to date info, and use the data you have to analyse trends, worsening conditions and conduct hypotheses. It will help you also get rid of the massive folders of paper records and allow data to be entered in real-time and used immediately. Good news and bad news. The data is available to anyone and any GP or consultant if you move house. The bad news is the data has to be protected in a massive way and not just accessible by giving your name and date of birth or NHS number. The Vaccine passport will then be part of it. Does the good outweigh the bad?
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I suspect more lefty than liberal.
Talking of missed labels...
I recall when Polly Toynbee wrote a rather anguished column. She just discovered libertarianism, but was really upset to find that people using that fine sounding name were obsessed with individual liberty. She wanted to redefine it as accepting and welcoming all "good government" in the name of "collective liberty"....
The most important question about the vaccine passports hasn't been discussed.
What colour will they be?
I've got a little blue and white card with the dates of vaccination, plus batch number on it. Or at least I will have tomorrow, when the second one is added. I reckon that should be enough.
OT Betfair is down again (third time in two days or is it fourth in three?). I'd be wary of attempting any sort of trading during (say) a football or cricket match until stability returns. I've no idea what the cause is and Betfair is apparently none too sure either.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
You can sense a lot by those most angry about it. The attempted import of the poisonous Critical Race Theory, which to sum up in a few words claims that all interactions and differences between races are due to structural racism, and that in all circumstances this is down to white supremacy. The core is not whether racism might exists or not in any given situation or organisation, but how does it manifest itself. If you cant see it, you arent looking hard enough for it.
This ideology has been creeping through our institutions over the last year.
There would be a lot of people whose ride on the racial wars gravy train would come to a juddering halt if this report was widely accepted. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I suspect more lefty than liberal.
Talking of missed labels...
I recall when Polly Toynbee wrote a rather anguished column. She just discovered libertarianism, but was really upset to find that people using that fine sounding name were obsessed with individual liberty. She wanted to redefine it as accepting and welcoming all "good government" in the name of "collective liberty"....
The trend in the construction industry is towards the use of digital twins. That is a digital copy of a physical entity. It will be used in other areas and the most useful area will be to create a digital twin of a human being using up-to-date medical info. The advantages are that you can discard irrelevant out of date info with up to date info, and use the data you have to analyse trends, worsening conditions and conduct hypotheses. It will help you also get rid of the massive folders of paper records and allow data to be entered in real-time and used immediately. Good news and bad news. The data is available to anyone and any GP or consultant if you move house. The bad news is the data has to be protected in a massive way and not just accessible by giving your name and date of birth or NHS number. The Vaccine passport will then be part of it. Does the good outweigh the bad?
Can you elaborate on this 'digital twin' concept in the construction industry please? Is this different to a Revit model, for example?
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
Some will just disagree with the conclusions no doubt (which admittedly is the sort of conclusion I'd prefer, but I have not read it so can't comment on its worthiness as a conclusion), but I wonder if part of it as well is the tendency in some spheres to dampen down on 'good' news, for fear it will cause complacency and a lack of further progress or even a regression. Which at least would be noble in aim and you can imagine how some people would use a 'done well' opinion as a reason to do no more, but it would still be incorrect as you need to be honest about a situation to tackle it. A noble lie, if that is what it was, would still be a lie.
Added to that if you treat situations as if all previous measures and actions have had no effect - a common issue with more extreme environmental campaigners for example - then it does rather make people beg the question why do anything.
One thing that seems to have improved markedly since the turn of the millenium specifically is diversity among MPs. I don't know if there was a push among the parties, or just natural progression through politics, but the face of politics has certainly been changing.
I read the summary of the race report yesterday and I can see why people have got issues with it but also think the report is broadly correct in its conclusions.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
I suspect more lefty than liberal.
Not rarely, and I'm guilty of this myself, liberal is used by people as a synonym for 'good'. 'Progressive' is similar, but more obviously aligned to one side of the left-right spectrum, as plenty of Tories would also call themselves liberal, whether they actually are liberal or not.
Comments
Has read the relevant material
Isn't ideologically committed to a knee jerk reaction
Doesn't think that 'We are racist' or 'We are not racist' are meaningful generalisations about 65m people
Pays careful attention to a range of arguments
Doesn't appear to hate quite a lot of people
Doesn't talk in simplistic phrases
Appears to be able to respect more than one viewpoint simultaneously.
Can anyone help?
We have the following to look forward to, inevitably - a holidayer who uses a fake letter/vaccine passport to go on holiday. Gets put in jail in somewhere like Thailand and threatened with a decade behind bars. Should we chose sides on this one now, or later?
Mr. Royale, the 'denial' line is a pathetic route taken by many in this area. If you disagree you're a 'denier', as per the internalised racism that all white people have if you believe certain dingbat theories.
Mr. Flare, I agree entirely. As an aside, I don't have a smartphone. I don't want one to install a Big Brother app.
A single glance at the electoral map of Ukraine suggests that a certain amount of disagreement internally as to who they are and where they belong may be likely, and that the Russians may be interested in quite a bit of it.
I don't suppose odds are offered on a good number of the seats.
By the way the UK is not just London
I think the key issue here is scope creep of the words "institutional" or "structural" racism. This report, and I think most people, take that to mean where a system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities whereas I think others use it to mean racism is still a factor in their everyday lives (the "nod", the "nudge", the "glare", the hoverring security guard etc).
If you think saying there's no evidence for the former is really you saying the latter doesn't exist then you're going to be pissed off but that's not what this report says. It is merely critical of the current trend for *every* disparity in outcome (I'm looking at you, BBC, as a loudhailer for this) to be explained directly by racism as a catch-all explanation, which isn't supported by the evidence:
"Britain is no longer a country where the system is “deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities” and very few inequalities are directly to do with race, a major review of racial disparities has concluded.
The review, carried out by a panel of ten commissioners who were appointed by the government last year at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, said it found no evidence of “institutional racism” in the UK and criticised the “confusing” way in which the term has been applied.
But it added that it did not deny that racism was a “real force” in the UK that needed to be taken seriously."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/key-findings-from-the-sewell-report-on-racial-equality-kshcgqfr7
Pimlico plumbers require all employees to have a vaccine apparently
Bad news is instead, they'll pop round to see their mates - indoors....
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/uk-customs-look-for-spelling-errors-in-fake-coronavirus-documents-1.1181883
No need to think there won’t be a problem with fake vaccine certificates too. The fake vaccine certificates may even be stuck in fake passports.
The BBC's interpretation of non bias tends to mean that it's OK to interview two ignorant polemicists with preordained knee jerk reactions as long as they are ignorant on opposite sides.
Google forecasts are rubbish.
WeatherPro, Weathercast or look at the models.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/breaking-down-etihad-s-impressive-crew-vaccine-claim/ar-BB1dBs74
If those conditions are satisfied then I'm not necessarily opposed.
Passports are a plausible idea (note not a good idea as we have a habit of scope creep whenever these ideas appear in the UK) if and when everyone has had the chance to be properly vaccinated. But that isn't now that is September at the earliest.
And then I would still say no as it the scope and rules will change and they would be reimplemented every time a variation appears and x% have been vaccinated.
I watch the met Office weather forecasts on Sky and BBC
And I would respectively suggest they are more knowledgeable than yourself on this subject
Why would I, a vaccinated person, be bothered if the crew are vaccinated?
And, of course, it'll still be some time before everyone has been offered 2 doses and had the 3-week waiting period to take full effect, by which time we'll be heading into winter and fresh paranoia.
And the downside is trivial, not some Big Brother intrusion. I was given a vaccination card when I had my first shot, and I'm happy to show it to anyone who asks. What's the problem?
Why create the bureaucracy of the system without yet having a clear idea of exactly how many people are not going to take the vaccine to begin with?
However on group 2 spreading the infection and prolonging the situation — they're going to do that anyway. People who are very opposed to vaccinations are unlikely to get vaccinated in any case.
I don't have a problem with businesses requesting proof of vaccine, for whatever reason, but I don't think it should be mandatory by government decree.
https://twitter.com/EuroGuido/status/1377530935990706178?s=19
Check vaccines at the border, not internally.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1377537669652172802?s=20
But weather forecasting, although better than it was, isn't at, for example, postcode level (in the sense of AA1 1AA) isn't yet exact. Good, better than it was, admittedly.
Edit, BBC site has now dropped the likelihood of sleet to below 20%. So would appear it's regularly updated.
Now the ones no-one previously wanted are the ones people want as they haven't (yet) heard the issues about them.
I think the issue is that the report talks about Britain as it is today, rather than the Britain that existed previously. Even as recently as 20 years ago this country was, IMO, fairly racist. I remember experiencing it first hand on many occasions when I was a kid and my parents have got some pretty awful stories. That was then and the report specifically deals with racism today and IMO racism today is a tiny problem. So the report doesn't match with my lived experience or the experiences of the majority of non-white people in this country. But it rightly says that the situation today isn't the same and our experiences are now, happily, consigned to the dustbin of history.
To put it into context from my personal perspective, the most racism I face today is from liberal lefty white people who won't hesitate to imply that I'm a race traitor for not buying into their bullshit narrative of grievances.
From what I can see it is entirely possible that there will be snow on Easter Monday if the precipitation is heavy enough, although specific locations are difficult at this point. GFS has the entire SE with a snow risk. It is very unlikely to lie for any length of time.
I'm sure Kamski can explain the levels of xenophobia.
What colour will they be?
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1377358072314654720
As you say, bureaucratic nightmare for a situation where we already know the vast majority of people have it anyway. Waste of time.
If you want to build confidence in people to resume daily life then that comes from the government sounding the effective all-clear signal. They're not doing that yet - potentially rightly - but when they get to the June 21 stage if they are removing all legal elements then at that point they need to be shouting from the rooftops that its safe to go outside and do stuff again without endless worrying about what is now allowed and what isn't.
If they wishy-washy it with stuff like "it's fine, honest, but be careful", people are just going to hunker down forever.
Did we lose a war or something?
(I know, I know, King Richard I used 'Dieu et mon droit' when defeating the French at the Battle of Gisors but what's the excuse for 'honi soit qui mal y pense'?)
Shame is apt for having French polluting our passports.
There is a non-zero risk, agreed. However there is a large odds-on risk that it won't happen, despite the usual weather-based ramping and hysteria on here, which nine times out of ten is proven wrong!
This conversation is bizarre.
Last week:
Big G: It will snow on Friday.
Anabob: Maybe on the top of Snowdon.
Big G: Nothing about Snowdon, it will snow.
Anabob: Not at low levels.
Friday arrives. No lowland snow.
Anabob: I was right. No snow.
Big G: The Met Office know more than you do.
Notifiable -> Potential liability -> Condition of insurance -> Passport required
route to their introduction
I was at university then.
Firstly what is being suggested is not just a piece of paper but an electronic tracing system. That very much is Big Brother.
Secondly it is something that will be expected to be policed by venues and pubs etc. They simply won't do that because it is impractical. You ae not talking about a few customers who look under 18 but every single customer having to be checked. Pubs certainly don't want it and its basic application is impractical.
Thirdly what do you do about the people who actually work in the venues? Are you going to insist on their vaccination? If not then the whole thing is pointless.
Any vaccine passport system designed to help venues reopen will have the exact opposite effect and cause many to shut down permanently.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1377544568523083778?s=20
Government appear to be rowing back on the idea already.
Well worth perusing.
https://twitter.com/K_G_Andersen/status/1377425157023690753
Whether the timescales happen or not, the priorities are right.
(I'm always scared I'm going to misspell some of those vowels
https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1377265230317772803
I suspect areas with higher concentrations of non-white people will see higher proportions of anti-vaxxers within those non-white demographics.
Anti-vaxxers find it easier where they have a larger potential population in which to spread in the same way as a virus does.
Maybe we should also have Scots and Irish Gaelic, Welsh, Doric and Geordie too? And a couple of lines of Cockney Rhyming Slang to boot.
This ideology has been creeping through our institutions over the last year.
"66,666 people are currently predicted to have symptomatic COVID in the UK"
It will help you also get rid of the massive folders of paper records and allow data to be entered in real-time and used immediately.
Good news and bad news. The data is available to anyone and any GP or consultant if you move house. The bad news is the data has to be protected in a massive way and not just accessible by giving your name and date of birth or NHS number. The Vaccine passport will then be part of it.
Does the good outweigh the bad?
I recall when Polly Toynbee wrote a rather anguished column. She just discovered libertarianism, but was really upset to find that people using that fine sounding name were obsessed with individual liberty. She wanted to redefine it as accepting and welcoming all "good government" in the name of "collective liberty"....
Added to that if you treat situations as if all previous measures and actions have had no effect - a common issue with more extreme environmental campaigners for example - then it does rather make people beg the question why do anything.
One thing that seems to have improved markedly since the turn of the millenium specifically is diversity among MPs. I don't know if there was a push among the parties, or just natural progression through politics, but the face of politics has certainly been changing. Not rarely, and I'm guilty of this myself, liberal is used by people as a synonym for 'good'. 'Progressive' is similar, but more obviously aligned to one side of the left-right spectrum, as plenty of Tories would also call themselves liberal, whether they actually are liberal or not.