Just think about how utterly screwed we would be if Covid's hospitilisation rate was 100% without a vaccine.
That would be Ebola, but with an asymptomatic but infectious incubation period, and humanity would have been utterly screwed by it.
If you were designing a viral weapon, that’s what you’d go for - something that people spend a week or two spreading to everyone they meet without knowing it, before they suddenly fall down seriously sick or worse.
I once had a horrible idea for a bio-weapon story. Something that kills the liver, slowly, but 100% of the time and is super infectious.
Besides the content, check the language on this Dutch tweet. There is so much English in it, she is basically speaking English
I’ve seen the same in Sweden and Denmark. I wonder if these smaller European languages will survive for much longer. The urge to talk - certainly online - in plain English, and finally abandon Dutch, must be intense. You instantly get a vastly bigger audience, and you’re already halfway there
‘Peter Daszak, lid vh WHO-team dat in China herkomst coronavirus onderzocht, heeft nu fuller disclosure gegeven over financiering door non-profit waarvan hij president is en dat eerder onderzoek van het Wuhanlab financieerde, recent onthuld door Vanity Fair.’
Swedish will extinct within a hundred years. The propensity to gleefully abandon perfectly good Swedish words and phrases for English (sometimes pseudo-English) ones is astonishing. Anyone who objects is ridiculed as a fuddy duddy who’s not down with the kids. It is part of the infamous “opinion corridor”.
I hope not. I think it's important that these languages survive. Using English ought to be discouraged in these countries. In fact I think Danish universities recently decided to stop teaching in English.
I try to discourage it, but I’m fighting a losing battle. I nearly always speak Swedish outwith the home, but we switched to English at home when the youngest was born, and sometime the language mixing within the family takes on surreal and comic levels. Even the basic grammar transmogrifies.
But what worries me is not the immigrants, like me, who use English, but the native Swedes who seem to be on a mission to assassinate their own language.
(For clarification: it is US English they use, not English English.)
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Looking at the vaccination numbers, very very low at the weekend.
Bit strange given there was supposed to be "Super Saturday". Again, shows us that focus on a few big lines at a handful of vaccination centres doesn't necessarily tell us what is happening nationwide.
So, almost all the new cases are among teens and twenties. Among the hospitalisations, there’s very few oldies any more - as much as we can define from those groupings, anyway.
Vaccines are working!!!
The sizes of the age groups in the admissions chart are surely VERY different, though - 15-64 is huge, 85+ not so much. So showing absolute numbers seems misleading?
All of the cases have been asymptomatic....its like vaccines work or something.
Saw that yesterday. Prayers are with them. Terrifying outbreak of people feeling fit and well.
Statistically must be a reasonable chance that someone dies though to set off a new panic
Given in a care home, in which unfortunately people die on a fairly regular basis, I would have thought in an average week there is a fairly good chance one of the residence dies, because well they are very old.
Looking at the vaccination numbers, very very low at the weekend.
Bit strange given there was supposed to be "Super Saturday". Again, shows us that focus on a few big lines at a handful of vaccination centres doesn't necessarily tell us what is happening nationwide.
Looking at the vaccination numbers, very very low at the weekend.
Bit strange given there was supposed to be "Super Saturday". Again, shows us that focus on a few big lines at a handful of vaccination centres doesn't necessarily tell us what is happening nationwide.
Looking at the vaccination numbers, very very low at the weekend.
Bit strange given there was supposed to be "Super Saturday". Again, shows us that focus on a few big lines at a handful of vaccination centres doesn't necessarily tell us what is happening nationwide.
Nah, it's a technical issue.
Yep - no England figure. But I do thing all the “big events at football stadiums” were more designed for show and wouldn’t have had much effect on the overall numbers.
Just think about how utterly screwed we would be if Covid's hospitilisation rate was 100% without a vaccine.
That would be Ebola, but with an asymptomatic but infectious incubation period, and humanity would have been utterly screwed by it.
If you were designing a viral weapon, that’s what you’d go for - something that people spend a week or two spreading to everyone they meet without knowing it, before they suddenly fall down seriously sick or worse.
I once had a horrible idea for a bio-weapon story. Something that kills the liver, slowly, but 100% of the time and is super infectious.
It’s odd, for a betting site, that so many posters are so uncomfortable with uncertainty.
It’s ok to not yet know things.
And to plan on the basis that you don’t yet know things.
That’s what the government is doing, and for that, I applaud them.
I'm not able to applaud, since they've messed up so much, but I essentially agree with this. The delay is to allow greater certainty of the relationship between Delta and hospitals and vaccination levels. It's not a crazy decision. And if it turns out serious illness doesn't take off to the extent feared, well great, this should be welcomed rather than offered as proof the delay was wrong. Because it won't mean the delay was wrong. What it'll mean is the July 19th 'terminus' can be approached with a confidence level that would have been lacking on June 21st.
So, almost all the new cases are among teens and twenties. Among the hospitalisations, there’s very few oldies any more - as much as we can define from those groupings, anyway.
Vaccines are working!!!
The sizes of the age groups in the admissions chart are surely VERY different, though - 15-64 is huge, 85+ not so much. So showing absolute numbers seems misleading?
Yes, that silly large band is really annoying, polite request to NHS to please break down further.
What we do know, it that six months ago that band was smaller in size (of admissions per capita) than all of the bands above it.
Pensioners are not going to hospital in a fraction of the numbers they were doing in previous waves - because they’ve almost all been vaccinated!
Zerocovidianism and antivaxxery –– two cheeks of the same pompous arse.
Please don't come out with that straw-man drivel.
What it's about is not at all to do with "Zero COVID". It's about preventing yet another surge in hospitalisations that could overwhelm the NHS.
In case you haven't noticed, not only cases, but also hospitalisations and deaths are currently rising by 34%+ per week.
Of course vaccines can reduce the percentages that go to hospital and die, but frankly with the 60% who are most vulnerable already doubly vaccinated, they're not going to fall much further. You need to control infection too, and it's not happening.
But I know it's a waste of time saying it here.
There's nothing in the numbers to suggest we face a surge that would overwhelm the NHS. Death rates are so low that very small shifts in numbers look big in percentage terms. Numbers in hospital have been increasing slowly and are currently about 4% of where they were in January. Mass vaccination has worked.
Trends (and hence percentages) provide useful information, but they should always be trumped by absolute numbers. Percentages is how we get the WHO telling us not to eat cured meats, because it gives a 20% increase of the chance of colorectal cancer, whereas it increases your chances from 5 in 10,000 to 6 in 10,000.
So, almost all the new cases are among teens and twenties. Among the hospitalisations, there’s very few oldies any more - as much as we can define from those groupings, anyway.
Vaccines are working!!!
The sizes of the age groups in the admissions chart are surely VERY different, though - 15-64 is huge, 85+ not so much. So showing absolute numbers seems misleading?
Well, here is the chart scaled to 100K population per age group... which distorts things in another way...
It’s odd, for a betting site, that so many posters are so uncomfortable with uncertainty.
It’s ok to not yet know things.
And to plan on the basis that you don’t yet know things.
That’s what the government is doing, and for that, I applaud them.
I'm not able to applaud, since they've messed up so much, but I essentially agree with this. The delay is to allow greater certainty of the relationship between Delta and hospitals and vaccination levels. It's not a crazy decision. And if it turns out serious illness doesn't take off to the extent feared, well great, this should be welcomed rather than offered as proof the delay was wrong. Because it won't mean the delay was wrong. What it'll mean is the July 19th 'terminus' can be approached with a confidence level that would have been lacking on June 21st.
I'm concerned that the "terminus" may end up being merely a branch line.
Looking at the vaccination numbers, very very low at the weekend.
Bit strange given there was supposed to be "Super Saturday". Again, shows us that focus on a few big lines at a handful of vaccination centres doesn't necessarily tell us what is happening nationwide.
It’s odd, for a betting site, that so many posters are so uncomfortable with uncertainty.
It’s ok to not yet know things.
And to plan on the basis that you don’t yet know things.
That’s what the government is doing, and for that, I applaud them.
I'm not able to applaud, since they've messed up so much, but I essentially agree with this. The delay is to allow greater certainty of the relationship between Delta and hospitals and vaccination levels. It's not a crazy decision. And if it turns out serious illness doesn't take off to the extent feared, well great, this should be welcomed rather than offered as proof the delay was wrong. Because it won't mean the delay was wrong. What it'll mean is the July 19th 'terminus' can be approached with a confidence level that would have been lacking on June 21st.
I think it was a pretty useful exercise to actually have models (and yes people will say the misuse/misrepresentation of the models) tested against the scenarios they were actually modelling. Ie. status quo situations.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Ok, so I’m three hours ahead of most of you, is it worth staying up until 1am when I know that England have qualified anyway, and I have to get up at 6:30 in the morning to go to work?
An important new NBER paper looks at impact of SIP (“shelter-in-place”) policies on excess mortality, i.e. including both deaths caused by Covid-19 AND deaths caused by lockdowns ...
Just skimmed the paper, the methodology looks absolute garbage designed to get a pre determined result
Not at all. It is a serious analysis by the authors and Paton's conclusion is: "Whatever the explanation, this key message should be headline news in every media outlet & repeated at the start of every Cabinet & SAGE meeting from now on: *we fail to find that shelter-in-place policies saved lives*
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
I don't think a Galloway win is totally out of the question. He could win with 30% with a split vote.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
It seems unlikely but I suppose if people think that Galloway is the best way to stop the tories......
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
IMHO the betting strategy is to lay Labour. That covers off the moron doing what he’s done before, inflaming racial tensions and getting a lopsided turnout from certain ‘communities’.
It’s odd, for a betting site, that so many posters are so uncomfortable with uncertainty.
It’s ok to not yet know things.
And to plan on the basis that you don’t yet know things.
That’s what the government is doing, and for that, I applaud them.
I'm not able to applaud, since they've messed up so much, but I essentially agree with this. The delay is to allow greater certainty of the relationship between Delta and hospitals and vaccination levels. It's not a crazy decision. And if it turns out serious illness doesn't take off to the extent feared, well great, this should be welcomed rather than offered as proof the delay was wrong. Because it won't mean the delay was wrong. What it'll mean is the July 19th 'terminus' can be approached with a confidence level that would have been lacking on June 21st.
Yes, agreed. Tapering the end of restrictions cautiously is fair enough after the amount of hokey cokey we have had for the last 18 months
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
IMHO the betting strategy is to lay Labour. That covers off the moron doing what he’s done before, inflaming racial tensions and getting a lopsided turnout from certain ‘communities’.
I watched one of Galloway's ads, and he is not just pitching for the votes of one community.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
I don't think a Galloway win is totally out of the question. He could win with 30% with a split vote.
Oh don't say that, Andy. Please.
Thing is, I can't ignore you on this one after your mightily impressive Amersham call.
It’s odd, for a betting site, that so many posters are so uncomfortable with uncertainty.
It’s ok to not yet know things.
And to plan on the basis that you don’t yet know things.
That’s what the government is doing, and for that, I applaud them.
I'm not able to applaud, since they've messed up so much, but I essentially agree with this. The delay is to allow greater certainty of the relationship between Delta and hospitals and vaccination levels. It's not a crazy decision. And if it turns out serious illness doesn't take off to the extent feared, well great, this should be welcomed rather than offered as proof the delay was wrong. Because it won't mean the delay was wrong. What it'll mean is the July 19th 'terminus' can be approached with a confidence level that would have been lacking on June 21st.
Yes, agreed. Tapering the end of restrictions cautiously is fair enough after the amount of hokey cokey we have had for the last 18 months
Or: Tapering the end of restrictions cautiously is not fair enough after the amount of hokey cokey we have had for the last 18 months
Besides the content, check the language on this Dutch tweet. There is so much English in it, she is basically speaking English
I’ve seen the same in Sweden and Denmark. I wonder if these smaller European languages will survive for much longer. The urge to talk - certainly online - in plain English, and finally abandon Dutch, must be intense. You instantly get a vastly bigger audience, and you’re already halfway there
‘Peter Daszak, lid vh WHO-team dat in China herkomst coronavirus onderzocht, heeft nu fuller disclosure gegeven over financiering door non-profit waarvan hij president is en dat eerder onderzoek van het Wuhanlab financieerde, recent onthuld door Vanity Fair.’
Swedish will extinct within a hundred years. The propensity to gleefully abandon perfectly good Swedish words and phrases for English (sometimes pseudo-English) ones is astonishing. Anyone who objects is ridiculed as a fuddy duddy who’s not down with the kids. It is part of the infamous “opinion corridor”.
I hope not. I think it's important that these languages survive. Using English ought to be discouraged in these countries. In fact I think Danish universities recently decided to stop teaching in English.
I was in Copenhagen in December 2019 and it might as well have been an English-speaking city.
Interesting how Welsh is making a bit of a comeback, after being practically banned 120 years ago.
A lot of English conservatives used to be anti-the Welsh language. Now most of them have changed their mind.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
Just incredible....its like Labour is actually the ones in power, buggering up the border etc. Literally the Tories stay around 43%, and Labour just lose votes to the centre left parties.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
I don't think a Galloway win is totally out of the question. He could win with 30% with a split vote.
Oh don't say that, Andy. Please.
Thing is, I can't ignore you on this one after your mightily impressive Amersham call.
But if he can win with 30% of the vote then he’s got to take a chunk of votes from the Tories. Which then also might improve Labour’s chances.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Letting Tracey Brabin run for West Yorks mayor was a bloody good idea wasn't it...
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
A Galloway win would be very bad news for Starmer, but it would also not be great for Johnson, I guess.
Prediction for tonight: Eng 0 - 0 Cze in an excrutiating battle which entertains no-one but allows England to nudge through to the next round Sco 0 - 1 Cro in a match which eliminates the Scots in a some ludicrously unfortunate way.
Just incredible....its like Labour is actually the ones in power, buggering up the border etc. Literally the Tories stay around 43%, and Labour just lose votes to the centre left parties.
Labour have given their deadly opponents carte blanche for 18 months. They have given a leader who is a complete anathema to their base more power than any tory leader since Churchill during the war.
It is hardly surprising supporters are jumping ship.
The Croatia Scotland game is going to be far more interesting than England Czech Rep
I want the draw for England. I prefer 2nd place in the group given how the last 16 looks.
You may get your wish. This is a game that, in a way, neither team will want to win. I've laid England at 1.6.
One of my betting chestnuts. If both teams are happy with a draw, it's a draw.
But we have this Copenhagen thing now. So maybe not.
I think England will be desperate for a good performance. Get the doubters behind them and go into a big game at Wembley with a bit of confidence and the crowd behind them. And all of their potential opponents have shown vulnerability (albeit in high quality games)
Should be enough to ensure a glorious failure on penalties.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Letting Tracey Brabin run for West Yorks mayor was a bloody good idea wasn't it...
Brabin clearly sniffed the wind and thought the seat was moving against her...
Prediction for tonight: Eng 0 - 0 Cze in an excrutiating battle which entertains no-one but allows England to nudge through to the next round Sco 0 - 1 Cro in a match which eliminates the Scots in a some ludicrously unfortunate way.
You may be right, only 1 goal for England after 3 matches will be disappointing though and the fact that Kane was second fav to win Golden Boot pre-tournament was a laugh eh.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
A Galloway win would be very bad news for Starmer, but it would also not be great for Johnson, I guess.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
A Galloway win would be very bad news for Starmer, but it would also not be great for Johnson, I guess.
Wouldn't be great for any of us, would it? The man's a divisive narcissist.
An important new NBER paper looks at impact of SIP (“shelter-in-place”) policies on excess mortality, i.e. including both deaths caused by Covid-19 AND deaths caused by lockdowns ...
Just skimmed the paper, the methodology looks absolute garbage designed to get a pre determined result
Not at all. It is a serious analysis by the authors and Paton's conclusion is: "Whatever the explanation, this key message should be headline news in every media outlet & repeated at the start of every Cabinet & SAGE meeting from now on: *we fail to find that shelter-in-place policies saved lives*
It is deigned to setup shelter-in-place to fail.
I read the abstract and thought I must have misunderstood what they were analysising. But reading the paper shows I was not mistaken unless it is buried in the detail.
All they have shown is that states and counties hit by the pandemic had excess deaths. They have very carefully chosen their constraints so that there was no way of showing lockdowns had a positive effect.
Laurence Fox and Reclaim will be holding a public meeting at Batley Market on Thursday for an 'honest debate' on free speech and the Batley Grammar incident.
The Woollens guy will be there, Galloway will be speaking and the other candidates have been invited
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges' alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
Surely Galloway isn't actually going to win though? He may enthuse a significant subsection of the electorate - i.e. the Muslim vote - but that's no more than, what, 15-20%? I can't see his appeal spreading much beyond that, and even in a tight three way tussle the winner is going to need over 30%.
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
If turnout is only 50% though, that 20% of the electorate he’s enthused to support him might be 40% of the vote on the day.
A Galloway win would be very bad news for Starmer, but it would also not be great for Johnson, I guess.
I'm now expecting LP to lose Batley and Spen which will shorten the price for Starmer to lose leadership in 2021 - currently a lay at 5 with BF. I've already been chipping away at this bet but will top up mightily if it shortens.
Worst case scenario for this bet is that later in year he signals he is picking up sticks but will remain leader until a replacement is found. This will take over 3 months as per previous leadership contests, possibly dragging it into 2022.
Laying Starmer leaving in 2021 is a gift IMO. My favourite politics bet at the moment.
Prediction for tonight: Eng 0 - 0 Cze in an excrutiating battle which entertains no-one but allows England to nudge through to the next round Sco 0 - 1 Cro in a match which eliminates the Scots in a some ludicrously unfortunate way.
Nah, the true Scotland way to do it will be to be leading 1-0 in the 88th minute and concede from a header from some scrambled corner as the game ticks towards injury time, with the draw being no use to anyone.
Actually the truest way would have been for Scotland to win reasonably easily but somehow be the 5th best 3rd place team and go out anyway, but fate has decided at least it won't be THAT cruel this time round.
Besides the content, check the language on this Dutch tweet. There is so much English in it, she is basically speaking English
I’ve seen the same in Sweden and Denmark. I wonder if these smaller European languages will survive for much longer. The urge to talk - certainly online - in plain English, and finally abandon Dutch, must be intense. You instantly get a vastly bigger audience, and you’re already halfway there
‘Peter Daszak, lid vh WHO-team dat in China herkomst coronavirus onderzocht, heeft nu fuller disclosure gegeven over financiering door non-profit waarvan hij president is en dat eerder onderzoek van het Wuhanlab financieerde, recent onthuld door Vanity Fair.’
Swedish will extinct within a hundred years. The propensity to gleefully abandon perfectly good Swedish words and phrases for English (sometimes pseudo-English) ones is astonishing. Anyone who objects is ridiculed as a fuddy duddy who’s not down with the kids. It is part of the infamous “opinion corridor”.
Strong disagree. I work for a Swedish company (whose employees trend young) and have visited Stockholm several times now. Swedish remains the language Swedish people talk to each other in in non-business contexts at work and while socializing. So what if it acquires English loan words? (Insert obligatory ref to James Nicoll's screed on the "purity" of English itself.) That's what languages do.
It's the languages like French that have strongly conservative "governing bodies" always on the lookout to strike out any furrin innovations that are more likely to ossify and die in the long run.
Swedish has such a body.
Incidentally, are you a fluent Swedish speaker? You might not realise the startling anglicisation going on.
No, I am not. But my point is that taking vocabulary from another language is not of itself a sign of concern. Now, if you think Swedish grammar is anglicising, that could be a different matter.
Is Labour's problem Starmer or is it all the Labour numpties that pop up in the media? Starmer isn't exactly exciting, but I can't quite get my head around how he has made Labour so unpopular, especially against Boris who is shall we say divisive. 30% is absolute bedrock for Labour and Tory.
Laurence Fox and Reclaim will be holding a public meeting at Batley Market on Thursday for an 'honest debate' on free speech and the Batley Grammar incident.
The Woollens guy will be there, Galloway will be speaking and the other candidates have been invited
Cases continuing to rise by over 30% week-on-week, which means the fall in the growth rate has stalled somewhat. In some ways the growth rate is really quite incredible when the ONS estimates 87% of adults in England tested positive for antibodies on w/c 7 June.
I know cases aren't what we should focus on, but I think the continued growth will rule out the government easing restrictions 2 weeks early on 5 July. But I still think they will go ahead with the 19 July opening on current data.
Prediction for tonight: Eng 0 - 0 Cze in an excrutiating battle which entertains no-one but allows England to nudge through to the next round Sco 0 - 1 Cro in a match which eliminates the Scots in a some ludicrously unfortunate way.
Too emphatic - surely the Scots game will be a draw with Scotland having a sumptuous winning goal chalked off for offside by a micrometre on VAR
An important new NBER paper looks at impact of SIP (“shelter-in-place”) policies on excess mortality, i.e. including both deaths caused by Covid-19 AND deaths caused by lockdowns ...
Quoting the paper: “we would expect lower excess mortality in the weeks following SIP implementation in countries that implemented SIP policies relative to countries that did not implement policies”
Err. No.
You would not expect mortality to drop after lockdown starts (whether officially or not) for at least 2 weeks, because that’s how long it usually took for someone to get Covid & die from it on average. Oh, and that’s from being symptomatic -> death. Covid has a relatively long asymptomatic period (which is why it’s so infectious), so the probable mean time from infection -> death is probably closer to three weeks.
So we do not expect the death rate to drop after the introduction of lockdowns for /at least/ three weeks, if not longer, during which time the death rate will rise at first due to infections that occurred shortly before the lockdown started (that might otherwise have beenb avoided).
Unless I have got this very wrong & missed something crucial (entirely possible!), this entire paper is based on a complete misunderstanding of the timing of Covid deaths: They’ve found a spurious association between lockdowns and excess deaths, because we brought in lockdowns when covid infections were rising exponentially & those infections led to excess deaths that occurred during the lockdown period due to the lag time between infection & patient death.
If they were comparing excess deaths three-four weeks after lockdowns started then that might be a more appropriate comparison.
(I’d like to see a model that included the local R rate for each locality, estimated either from excess deaths or known covid infections & incorporated into an estimate of the number of expected deaths from Covid; that ought to show whether lockdowns “work” or not, given sufficient data.)
Laurence Fox and Reclaim will be holding a public meeting at Batley Market on Thursday for an 'honest debate' on free speech and the Batley Grammar incident.
The Woollens guy will be there, Galloway will be speaking and the other candidates have been invited
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
Dan Hodges alleges that the labour candidate is facing homophobic attacks, Starmer is facing anti-semitic attacks, and yet labour are not responding because they don't want to upset a part of labour's base.
This is what happens if you court voters with totally different moral values.
O/T - Can someone explain to me why discussions of white privilege which really only started in the UK in the last few years is the reason why white working class children have had poor educational outcomes for decades?
Am I missing something major or are people talking shite?
Con 44 (+3) Lab 30 (-4) LD 10 (+2) Grn 5 (-1) SNP 4 (-1) Other 6 (-1)
18th - 20th June
What hoped has Starmer got if he loses B & S
Starmer has shown himself to be unlucky and short of leadrship skills in equal measure His Palestinian bashing coincided with one of Israels rampages where they used Gaza for target practice The timing was unlucky but if you tie yourself to an incontinent horse you get covered in s***. I fear this is going to lose him Batley and Spen. (Watch out for Gorgeous George surprisingly us)
The second problem is leadership. He should be taking a leaf out of Burnham's book. Pick a fight. If Johnson Zigs Starmer should Zag. There's nothing coherent about Burnham but he looks tough and at the moment that's what the 55% of Johnson haters want to see..
O/T - Can someone explain to me why discussions of white privilege which really only started in the UK in the last few years is the reason why white working class children have had poor educational outcomes for decades?
Am I missing something major or are people talking shite?
It's almost as if social class, and social deprivation make a huge impact on educational outcomes 🤔
An important new NBER paper looks at impact of SIP (“shelter-in-place”) policies on excess mortality, i.e. including both deaths caused by Covid-19 AND deaths caused by lockdowns ...
Just skimmed the paper, the methodology looks absolute garbage designed to get a pre determined result
Not at all. It is a serious analysis by the authors and Paton's conclusion is: "Whatever the explanation, this key message should be headline news in every media outlet & repeated at the start of every Cabinet & SAGE meeting from now on: *we fail to find that shelter-in-place policies saved lives*
I see they've uncovered the staggering conclusion that in the immediate couple or three weeks after lockdowns are implemented, deaths continue rising and then fall slowly.
Almost as if there's a 2-3 week lag between infections and deaths.
Every bubble above the line is a local area with declining case levels - many more than a few days ago and most of the high areas moving in that direction.
That is a superb visualisation. I have one quibble with it: that I had to take a moment to understand what it is saying because the axes are reversed compared to what I am used to - namely that the 'independent variable' (i.e. data on the the earlier date) would be on the horizontal axis and the 'dependent variable' (later data) on the vertical axis.
The animated visualisation (with the description) is the only Tweet worth looking at IMO, as it shows rapid growth, followed by declining case numbers.
Is Labour's problem Starmer or is it all the Labour numpties that pop up in the media? Starmer isn't exactly exciting, but I can't quite get my head around how he has made Labour so unpopular, especially against Boris who is shall we say divisive. 30% is absolute bedrock for Labour and Tory.
It’s that he’s been totally invisible, only popping up to make jibes in hindsight or on irrelevancies, spending six question on wallpaper when hundreds of people were dying
There’s millions of people who oppose the government’s actions one way or another, including a bunch of Tory MPs. LotO’s job is to find a way of bringing a vote on something that unites opponents of the government.
He’s also, necessarily, alienated quite a bit of his own party’s previous support. He now needs to understand that his route to power is 70 or 80 seats currently held by the Tories, needs to work out policies that will appeal to them and push them hard.
Yes it's just a few stores but these are all in prime-ish sites selling expensive tat to children.
That's sad. We went to the Disney Store in the Trafford Centre the other day, first time going to Trafford since the pandemic began and the kids loved it - though my youngest went to school the next day and told her friends and Reception teacher that she'd been to Disneyland - didn't realise the difference. 😂
Yet you were telling me last night that the end of foreign travel until 2023 was no biggie, and we would replace all the foreign tourists with locals going to London to see The Mousetrap, again and again
THIS is what "no tourism" actually means: thousands of shops and businesses closing down forever, with incalculable ripple effects
The high street has been dying for years. This has nothing to do with tourism - there's a reason the London store is being kept open while the Trafford, Liverpool One and other stores are getting axed.
Realistically people are shopping more on Amazon nowadays and stores are dying. Its a shame to see this one go, but its not a surprise.
If tourism doesn't recover, the regional big cities of the North will be worst hit.
George Galloway was 60/1 yesterday. Now he's somewhere between 15/1 and 25/1, although the numbers are changing all the time. Of course whether this reflects reality is another matter. It may just be punters messing about, so to speak.
Punters gambling on a total Labour collapse. One wouldn't have thought an actual win for Galloway possible with anything less.
I don't think a Galloway win is totally out of the question. He could win with 30% with a split vote.
Oh don't say that, Andy. Please.
Thing is, I can't ignore you on this one after your mightily impressive Amersham call.
But if he can win with 30% of the vote then he’s got to take a chunk of votes from the Tories. Which then also might improve Labour’s chances.
He's a hard left, hard right, unwoke, BritNat, with a nod to antisemitism. Something for everyone there. But what he really is, of course, is a narcissist who gurns for attention.
Con 44 (+3) Lab 30 (-4) LD 10 (+2) Grn 5 (-1) SNP 4 (-1) Other 6 (-1)
18th - 20th June
What hoped has Starmer got if he loses B & S
Starmer has shown himself to be unlucky and short of leadrship skills in equal measure His Palestinian bashing coincided with one of Israels rampages where they used Gaza for target practice The timing was unlucky but if you tie yourself to an incontinent horse you get covered in s***. I fear this is going to lose him Batley and Spen. (Watch out for Gorgeous George surprisingly us)
The second problem is leadership. He should be taking a leaf out of Burnham's book. Pick a fight. If Johnson Zigs Starmer should Zag. There's nothing coherent about Burnham but he looks tough and at the moment that's what the 55% of Johnson haters want to see..
First big problem is that Starmer had been doing the Right Thing on Covid Lockdowns but has neither got credit or any sort of quid pro quo from Bozza. And there have been too many nutters on the government backbenchers to be able to zig zag without calamity.
Second problem is that Starmer has pissed off his own lunatic fringe without getting much/any credit from centrists. And I don't know how you solve that one.
O/T - Can someone explain to me why discussions of white privilege which really only started in the UK in the last few years is the reason why white working class children have had poor educational outcomes for decades?
Am I missing something major or are people talking shite?
Incidentally when we went to the Disneystore last week absolutely everything we looked at had a discount price sticker on it. 30% to 70% off everything.
Figured that was just because the store had been closed for so long that they had lots of stock to clear, but perhaps its an unofficial closing down sale?
Comments
What we do know, it that six months ago that band was smaller in size (of admissions per capita) than all of the bands above it.
Pensioners are not going to hospital in a fraction of the numbers they were doing in previous waves - because they’ve almost all been vaccinated!
Just checked. I've read my booklet wrong. It's Copenhagen. Oh.
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1407358881395847173
Ok, so I’m three hours ahead of most of you, is it worth staying up until 1am when I know that England have qualified anyway, and I have to get up at 6:30 in the morning to go to work?
"Whatever the explanation, this key message should be headline news in every media outlet & repeated at the start of every Cabinet & SAGE meeting from now on:
*we fail to find that shelter-in-place policies saved lives*
He might hole the Lab campaign below the waterline, but he isn't going to win himself, surely?
Thing is, I can't ignore you on this one after your mightily impressive Amersham call.
But we have this Copenhagen thing now. So maybe not.
Eng 0 - 0 Cze in an excrutiating battle which entertains no-one but allows England to nudge through to the next round
Sco 0 - 1 Cro in a match which eliminates the Scots in a some ludicrously unfortunate way.
It is hardly surprising supporters are jumping ship.
Should be enough to ensure a glorious failure on penalties.
The man's a divisive narcissist.
18th - 20th June
What hoped has Starmer got if he loses B & S
I read the abstract and thought I must have misunderstood what they were analysising. But reading the paper shows I was not mistaken unless it is buried in the detail.
All they have shown is that states and counties hit by the pandemic had excess deaths. They have very carefully chosen their constraints so that there was no way of showing lockdowns had a positive effect.
The Woollens guy will be there, Galloway will be speaking and the other candidates have been invited
What could possibly go wrong?
Worst case scenario for this bet is that later in year he signals he is picking up sticks but will remain leader until a replacement is found. This will take over 3 months as per previous leadership contests, possibly dragging it into 2022.
Laying Starmer leaving in 2021 is a gift IMO. My favourite politics bet at the moment.
Actually the truest way would have been for Scotland to win reasonably easily but somehow be the 5th best 3rd place team and go out anyway, but fate has decided at least it won't be THAT cruel this time round.
I’m laying England, too.
Value. Although I feel somewhat dirty.
So probably not.
I know cases aren't what we should focus on, but I think the continued growth will rule out the government easing restrictions 2 weeks early on 5 July. But I still think they will go ahead with the 19 July opening on current data.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd3Dwlr67oI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Test_cricket_hat-tricks
In the high 40s peaking at 49% after 11 years in power and three general elections.
I also have another government at 42% after 11 years in power and three general elections.
UNCOALITIONABLE should become unacceptable as using the N word.
Quoting the paper: “we would expect lower excess mortality in the weeks following SIP implementation in countries that implemented SIP policies relative to countries that did not implement policies”
Err. No.
You would not expect mortality to drop after lockdown starts (whether officially or not) for at least 2 weeks, because that’s how long it usually took for someone to get Covid & die from it on average. Oh, and that’s from being symptomatic -> death. Covid has a relatively long asymptomatic period (which is why it’s so infectious), so the probable mean time from infection -> death is probably closer to three weeks.
So we do not expect the death rate to drop after the introduction of lockdowns for /at least/ three weeks, if not longer, during which time the death rate will rise at first due to infections that occurred shortly before the lockdown started (that might otherwise have beenb avoided).
Unless I have got this very wrong & missed something crucial (entirely possible!), this entire paper is based on a complete misunderstanding of the timing of Covid deaths: They’ve found a spurious association between lockdowns and excess deaths, because we brought in lockdowns when covid infections were rising exponentially & those infections led to excess deaths that occurred during the lockdown period due to the lag time between infection & patient death.
If they were comparing excess deaths three-four weeks after lockdowns started then that might be a more appropriate comparison.
(I’d like to see a model that included the local R rate for each locality, estimated either from excess deaths or known covid infections & incorporated into an estimate of the number of expected deaths from Covid; that ought to show whether lockdowns “work” or not, given sufficient data.)
I guess the Tories are the only party that has worked out we're in the 21st century. Labour, no, 19th century. LDs, cavemen with teapots.
Could it be another S. Baker?
Am I missing something major or are people talking shite?
The second problem is leadership. He should be taking a leaf out of Burnham's book. Pick a fight. If Johnson Zigs Starmer should Zag. There's nothing coherent about Burnham but he looks tough and at the moment that's what the 55% of Johnson haters want to see..
Almost as if there's a 2-3 week lag between infections and deaths.
Someone must be told.
There’s millions of people who oppose the government’s actions one way or another, including a bunch of Tory MPs. LotO’s job is to find a way of bringing a vote on something that unites opponents of the government.
He’s also, necessarily, alienated quite a bit of his own party’s previous support. He now needs to understand that his route to power is 70 or 80 seats currently held by the Tories, needs to work out policies that will appeal to them and push them hard.
Second problem is that Starmer has pissed off his own lunatic fringe without getting much/any credit from centrists. And I don't know how you solve that one.
NEW THREAD