On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
We know exactly what ISAGE are all about - creating a public health centred, biosecurity state - because Michie has said she wants masks and social distancing to continue forever. They're extremists and only get as much oxygen as they do because (a) outlets like The Guardian latch on to anything which might be used as a stick to beat the Government and (b) the media as a whole likes to ramp up scare stories to generate clickbait. They tell us nothing useful.
The most worrying (but predictable) thing I have heard Michie openly say in interviews is that this pandemic requires us to radically reorganize the whole of society to protect us against such risks both now and the future. We all know from a committed life long communist what that means.
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
Very clear rises in cases in Spain and Portugal over the past 2 weeks...good job the rest of Europe won't be going there on their holidays anytime soon....especially given vaccinations although ramped up are still a fair way behind the UK, with even the likes of Germany still only on ~35% of the population being fully vaccinated.
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
In other words, the public are, on average, just as hypocritical as the politicians.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
We know exactly what ISAGE are all about - creating a public health centred, biosecurity state - because Michie has said she wants masks and social distancing to continue forever. They're extremists and only get as much oxygen as they do because (a) outlets like The Guardian latch on to anything which might be used as a stick to beat the Government and (b) the media as a whole likes to ramp up scare stories to generate clickbait. They tell us nothing useful.
It is worth noting that the second half of that article is a complete counter to the first. In general it is a balanced article, but it is an editorial decision to headline it as it does and push the initial argument first. You could easily write exactly the same article back to front with a completely different headline and with the ISage voices being the cautionary dissenting voices to what is being presented as a prevailing wisdom.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
Isn't that exactly what the JCVI are saying too? That they're trying to evaluate that and there's not sufficient evidence to say yet.
This may be the problematic section. Some children do suffer severely?
Is COVID more dangerous to kids than flu?
It’s obviously not a slam dunk. What’s for sure is that the decision needs to be for the benefit of the children not adults.
England hospitalisations for COVID
0 to 5 3098 0.77% 6 to 17 3031 0.76% 18 to 64 145759 36.35% 65 to 84 165240 41.21% 85+ 83816 20.90%
To what extent are 0-5 more likely to be hospitalised because we worry about small children?
I think we worry about small children because they're generally more vulnerable - i.e. for good reason.
I can’t find the numbers, but I think once a child is a year old, they’re pretty much as safe as all the years above them. I suspect the 0-5 hospitalisations skew to heavily to the under 1s.
Of course, the vaccines aren’t approved for under 12s...
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
The point I have continually made is, individuals can say what it is for them, but any movement you have to take the public with you. This gesture is divisive, half the public think it is overtly political.
And as I repeated ad infinitum, why in the NFL they said ok we hear you, and came up with a positive campaign that is totally unlinked to the extremes of BLM, Marxism, Defund Police, etc and which basically nobody has any issue with. Inspire Change is a much more positive message. It is still more "political" than I think would be acceptable to a lot of people in the UK, but the US has different problems.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
Doesn’t look likely we will ever have such evidence for the Chinese vaccines, because all the evidence is they don’t work.
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
I notice the Russians haven't been forthcoming with evidence for the European authorities and they now saying it seems unlikely it will get accredited for the foreseeable future. Those German's who went to Russia to jump the queue are going to be a bit snookered, as are the couple of Eastern European EU countries who decided to go with Chinese and Russian vaccines to get ahead of the sluggish roll out.
I do wonder what is going to happen. As the Chinese and Russian vaccines are been widely used outside of Europe. Is international travel for those people going to be barred for years to come?
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
Sam's starting up the outrage bus, and leaving out the actual content. The "Anti-vax" claim for Oliver's presentation is untrue, as far as I can see.
It seems to have been found guilty for something Oliver did not say.
His argument was about there not being sufficient evidence to justify children being vaccinated relative to the minimal harm done to that age group by Covid. He explicitly supports eg Human Papilloma virus vaccine for teenagers (as an example).
Isn't that exactly what the JCVI are saying too? That they're trying to evaluate that and there's not sufficient evidence to say yet.
This may be the problematic section. Some children do suffer severely?
Is COVID more dangerous to kids than flu?
It’s obviously not a slam dunk. What’s for sure is that the decision needs to be for the benefit of the children not adults.
England hospitalisations for COVID
0 to 5 3098 0.77% 6 to 17 3031 0.76% 18 to 64 145759 36.35% 65 to 84 165240 41.21% 85+ 83816 20.90%
To what extent are 0-5 more likely to be hospitalised because we worry about small children?
These are children actually admitted to hospital.
You'd have to ask Foxy & Co. - but in general doctors don't admit patients to hospital for LOLs or to reduce annoyance from pushy parents.
But presentation at hospital will vary by age as a consequence of parental concern. Once a child gets past three, I’d say the concern falls and continues to fall.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
The "experts" as Guardian calls them are psychologists and educationalists by looks of the quotes and so on. Are they really experts in the evolution of viral mutations? Me thinks not.
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
I notice the Russians haven't been forthcoming with evidence for the European authorities and they now saying it seems unlikely it will get accredited for the foreseeable future. Those German's who went to Russia to jump the queue are going to be a bit snookered, as are the couple of Eastern European EU countries who decided to go with Chinese and Russian vaccines to get ahead of the sluggish roll out.
I do wonder what is going to happen. As the Chinese and Russian vaccines are been widely used outside of Europe. Is international travel for those people going to be barred for years to come?
Presumably they would need to get a new vaccination with an approved product
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
I notice the Russians haven't been forthcoming with evidence for the European authorities and they now saying it seems unlikely it will get accredited for the foreseeable future. Those German's who went to Russia to jump the queue are going to be a bit snookered, as are the couple of Eastern European EU countries who decided to go with Chinese and Russian vaccines to get ahead of the sluggish roll out.
I do wonder what is going to happen. As the Chinese and Russian vaccines are been widely used outside of Europe. Is international travel for those people going to be barred for years to come?
When zero COVID idiots lose the battle here, they’ll pivot to arguing that it’s racist to pick on countries who have used questionable vaccines.
Husband relates something he was just reading about the breakdown of voting in Batley & Spen. Apparently Muslim wards broke heavily for Galloway, the Tories made significant headway in lower income areas in Batley, and Labour made significant headway in higher income areas in the Spen Valley - hence the final result. Make of this what you will.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
Doesn’t look likely we will ever have such evidence for the Chinese vaccines, because all the evidence is they don’t work.
I thought one was supposed to be pretty good, and the other not so much. “Does not work” is also a relative term - remember when vaccines were first being mooted aspirations were for 50+ effectiveness (something akin to regular flu vaccines) being a target. The effectiveness of the best vaccines may have completely changed perceptions about what can be achieved - I wonder if there is any reason to think perhaps the flu vaccines of the future may be massively better? But the problem we have is that WHO is pretty much sticking to the 50% (+safe) threshold for recommendation.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
The "experts" as Guardian calls them are psychologists and educationalists by looks of the quotes and so on. Are they really experts in the evolution of viral mutations? Me thinks not.
Michie isn’t even much of an expert in child psychology, having had to read one of her books.
Don’t worry, the SAJ is going to save us from the zerovidians
‘Javid said: “We need to be clear that cases are going to rise significantly. I know many people will be cautious about the easing of restrictions – that’s completely understandable. But no date we choose will ever come without risk, so we have to take a broad and balanced view.
“We are going to have to learn to accept the existence of Covid and find ways to cope with it – just as we already do with flu.”’
This eminently sensible statement was then completely misrepresented and skewed by, yes, some idiot Little Hitler scientist from Scotland
‘Reacting to the comments, Prof Stephen Reicher at the University of St Andrews, a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science, tweeted: “It is frightening to have a ‘health’ secretary who still thinks Covid is flu’
THAT’S NOT WHAT JAVID SAID AND YOU KNOW IT
At some point the more irresponsible scientists need punishing. This guy would be a good place to start
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
I think that’s a bit naive, Nick.
There are plenty of people in favour of house building who wouldn’t want them built across the road from them.
There are similarly surely lots of people who ‘support’ continuing with lifestyle restrictions for others, confident that they’ll be able to continue making their own choices without fear that any contravention of the regulations is ever likely to seriously be enforced.
As even the government’s useful idiot minister Jenrick was forced to admit on this morning’s #Marr, we have arrived at the point where people need to be trusted to make their own informed choices.
Of course, there will be those that make the wrong choice and end up facing (or their family or friends facing) the consequences of their mistake.
But that’s the way it always used to go for many aspects of life.
It’s time for us to return to normality and get the government out of trying to dictate (without enforcement) who can visit our home or how many people we can meet or what precautions we must take before going about our normal lives.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
The "experts" as Guardian calls them are psychologists and educationalists by looks of the quotes and so on. Are they really experts in the evolution of viral mutations? Me thinks not.
Michie isn’t even much of an expert in child psychology, having had to read one of her books.
To be fair, having met a number of child psychologists, a non-trivial proportion do not know anything about children psychology.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
Doesn’t look likely we will ever have such evidence for the Chinese vaccines, because all the evidence is they don’t work.
I thought one was supposed to be pretty good, and the other not so much. “Does not work” is also a relative term - remember when vaccines were first being mooted aspirations were for 50+ effectiveness (something akin to regular flu vaccines) being a target. The effectiveness of the best vaccines may have completely changed perceptions about what can be achieved - I wonder if there is any reason to think perhaps the flu vaccines of the future may be massively better? But the problem we have is that WHO is pretty much sticking to the 50% (+safe) threshold for recommendation.
The problem is Covid is somewhat more infectious than flu. We’ve had nerves about Delta infections when our vaccines are 90%+ effective - so anything under 70% (which I think both Chinese vaccines are) is simply not going to be up to it.
The fact that the Chinese version is an inferior product and ultimately more expensive hasn’t stopped them dominating many industrial fields, of course.
Husband relates something he was just reading about the breakdown of voting in Batley & Spen. Apparently Muslim wards broke heavily for Galloway, the Tories made significant headway in lower income areas in Batley, and Labour made significant headway in higher income areas in the Spen Valley - hence the final result. Make of this what you will.
Seems pretty logical and as you would expect under how things are going for the latter two. GG obviously being the unusual issue. Is it reasonable to expect he will keep doing this and possibly gain enough level of support to make his party a mainstream Islamic party?
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
We have seen it time and time again...people are given an inch and they take a mile. That's not everybody, but a significant proportion do e.g. its well reported huge percentage of people aren't sticking to the full isolation period. It is actually a major reason why COVID keeps spreading, because far too many people say well I did a couple of days and I feel fine, I'm off to Tescos to get some milk.
This has further been backed up by looking at when we have had lockdowns, and it has been shown the first few days at the start and the last few days at the end, the percentage of those sticking to the rules is significantly lower.
Its well reported people have been flying to different locations to avoid quarantine hotels. The "non-essential travel", loads of people went to the Middle East or the Caribbean "on-business" around Christmas / Early January, they went to India (and that is how we got the delta variant well seeded).
The government tried the please use your common sense, minimize this and that, and people went well the rules don't say I can't....and the government then had to bring in rules to stop it.
Look at the football viewing, you think people are sticking to the rules? Staying at their table, in their little pen, no hugging random strangers? Are they bollocks. This isn't 1 or 2 Hancocks, its 1000s and 1000s....hence why Scotland vs England game now has 1000s of new cases.
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
The "experts" as Guardian calls them are psychologists and educationalists by looks of the quotes and so on. Are they really experts in the evolution of viral mutations? Me thinks not.
Michie isn’t even much of an expert in child psychology, having had to read one of her books.
To be fair, having met a number of child psychologists, a non-trivial proportion do not know anything about children psychology.
The surprising implication of that comment is that you have met a substantial proportion who do know something about child psychology
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
To some extent that’s perhaps true. But I also think people behave based on what they think the crowd are doing.
We hosted a number of artists’ stalls at an open studios event today. The local artists were generally very cautious about Covid restrictions and mask wearing, and we had the NHS track and trace code to scan in as you entered, arrows for one way system, please wear a mask signs etc.
Once things got going. Well, I’d say 2/3s of people did generally stick with the masks, but the contemporary dance of the one way system? Nobody. And virtually nobody signed into the NHS app.
The fact is most adults are now double vaccinated, so they are simply not scared anymore. They know at heart that their risk is now the same risk as flu. They still do their bit to protect the vulnerable, but they’re clearly in the post-exam, end of term mindset now.
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
It isn't a case of a split, as you suggest. I think it is more a case of: at a theoretical level people support restrictions, but their ability to cope with incoherant rules that curtail freedom has been exhausted. For instance: at my son's school none of the parents wear masks any more when picking up/dropping off their kids, even though that is in the rules. They might say that they support restrictions, but they cannot follow the rules. It is not that suprising, humans are full of contradictions.
If I’m reading these graphs that @Malmesbury has helpfully provided throughout the last few months aright, I think they show:
Cases at the same level as the end of October and on the same trend;
Hospitalisations very slightly above the level of last August and on a much gentler upward trend.
Even allowing for much wider testing finding more cases, that’s surely pretty conclusive evidence that the vaccines are doing what’s needed now.
To me, its the combination of the disconnect between cases and hospital numbers and cases and deaths *combined* with the fact that we watched day by day as this happened and moved down the age cohorts, as the vaccines were rolled out.
For all of that to happen without vaccines being the cause - well, I would like someone to have a go at a convincing counter argument. I can't think of one.
Don’t worry, the SAJ is going to save us from the zerovidians
‘Javid said: “We need to be clear that cases are going to rise significantly. I know many people will be cautious about the easing of restrictions – that’s completely understandable. But no date we choose will ever come without risk, so we have to take a broad and balanced view.
“We are going to have to learn to accept the existence of Covid and find ways to cope with it – just as we already do with flu.”’
This eminently sensible statement was then completely misrepresented and skewed by, yes, some idiot Little Hitler scientist from Scotland
‘Reacting to the comments, Prof Stephen Reicher at the University of St Andrews, a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science, tweeted: “It is frightening to have a ‘health’ secretary who still thinks Covid is flu’
THAT’S NOT WHAT JAVID SAID AND YOU KNOW IT
At some point the more irresponsible scientists need punishing. This guy would be a good place to start
We should bear in mind at this juncture that many of the ISAGE types do not possess medical or epidemiological expertise anyway. Prof Reicher sits on SPI-B in his capacity as a social psychologist; Prof Michie is also a psychologist.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
Eric Topol @EricTopol · 24m Replying to @EricTopol Test positivity in Arkansas now 15% Missouri 11% Nevada 10% National average is 2.3%
Positivity rates have upticked a little here in NYS over the last week or so, but not really very significantly so. I think our high vaccination rate is serving us well.
Don’t worry, the SAJ is going to save us from the zerovidians
‘Javid said: “We need to be clear that cases are going to rise significantly. I know many people will be cautious about the easing of restrictions – that’s completely understandable. But no date we choose will ever come without risk, so we have to take a broad and balanced view.
“We are going to have to learn to accept the existence of Covid and find ways to cope with it – just as we already do with flu.”’
This eminently sensible statement was then completely misrepresented and skewed by, yes, some idiot Little Hitler scientist from Scotland
‘Reacting to the comments, Prof Stephen Reicher at the University of St Andrews, a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science, tweeted: “It is frightening to have a ‘health’ secretary who still thinks Covid is flu’
THAT’S NOT WHAT JAVID SAID AND YOU KNOW IT
At some point the more irresponsible scientists need punishing. This guy would be a good place to start
We should bear in mind at this juncture that many of the ISAGE types do not possess medical or epidemiological expertise anyway. Prof Reicher sits on SPI-B in his capacity as a social psychologist; Prof Michie is also a psychologist.
They need to be muted. Literally. Told to shut the fuck up, on social media. Or they get kicked off any SAGE committees
That is mass non-compliance. Totally out of whack with the polling that ask people if they support tough rules on COVID. So clearly there is a significant proportion of hypocrites out there.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
Doesn’t look likely we will ever have such evidence for the Chinese vaccines, because all the evidence is they don’t work.
I thought one was supposed to be pretty good, and the other not so much. “Does not work” is also a relative term - remember when vaccines were first being mooted aspirations were for 50+ effectiveness (something akin to regular flu vaccines) being a target. The effectiveness of the best vaccines may have completely changed perceptions about what can be achieved - I wonder if there is any reason to think perhaps the flu vaccines of the future may be massively better? But the problem we have is that WHO is pretty much sticking to the 50% (+safe) threshold for recommendation.
Kate Bingham, head of UK vaccine taskforce said she would have been happy at anything above 40% effectiveness. They are pretty remarkable vaccines.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
That is mass non-compliance. Totally out of whack with the polling that ask people if they support tough rules on COVID. So clearly there is a significant proportion of hypocrites out there.
That is from last September, although I can’t imagine the proportion has risen since.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
I think the poll is nonsense, and the 39% who think opposition to racism is apolitical are muddle-headed. Of course opposition to racism is political, whatever form it takes.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
If we are a free country, then if the players want to take a knee that is their right, and if some people want to boo that is their right.
To have a preference that people either dont take the knee or dont boo are reasonable positions but making it a massive issue and "demanding" either side stop are both completely out of proportion and run counter to the idea of a free society.
UK Minister James Dudderidge mistakes Zambia for Zimbabwe at KK's funeral. Either he is not very bright, lazy and ignorant or is supremely anti-woke, and he has picked up some serious brownie points for pretending he didn't know the difference.
Well at least he didn't call it Northern Rhodesia.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
If we are a free country, then if the players want to take a knee that is their right, and if some people want to boo that is their right.
To have a preference that people either dont take the knee or dont boo are reasonable positions but making it a massive issue and "demanding" either side stop are both completely out of proportion and run counter to the idea of a free society.
Did you see my original post? I said I would avoid being present because although I don’t agree with it I said it is the players choice and I would not be getting involved in disputes in the ground.
That is mass non-compliance. Totally out of whack with the polling that ask people if they support tough rules on COVID. So clearly there is a significant proportion of hypocrites out there.
That is from last September, although I can’t imagine the proportion has risen since.
Perhaps rather than ask for a "don't know" reply they could have asked for a response of "don't care".
With vaccinating teens, there’s actually another way to look at it:
“Should we forbid them from getting the vaccine if desired?”
Because that’s actually what we’re talking about. It’s not proposed to be compulsory, so what we’re discussing is whether we should continue to refuse those who want it.
Ensure that the risks are borne in mind (and I dislike it when they aren’t compared equally: the possible few per million risk of pericarditis from the vaccine seen as far greater than the order of magnitude greater (or two orders of magnitude) risk of exactly the same thing from covid. Or other causes of hospitalisation.
Yet the latter is classed as “no measurable harm” whilst the former is too great?
To such a degree that (even ignoring long-term effects of covid on some), we will insist on forbidding it to these teens?
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
I think the poll is nonsense, and the 39% who think opposition to racism is apolitical are muddle-headed. Of course opposition to racism is political, whatever form it takes.
Who is actually ‘unopposed to racism’ in modern Britain?
About 0.7%?
Even people who are overtly racist on occasion - who might use the N word in anger, or consider that such a race will never work as hard as others blah blah - would, I think, on reflection, believe that racism per se is BAD - as in apartheid South Africa or pre civil war USA - and should be opposed.
Put it another way, a lot of people are capable of stealing in multiple ways. From minor shop lifting to fiddling expenses or finding a way to access paywalled news sites without paying.
But very very few of them would say ‘I am not opposed to stealing’. Even tho they steal
Its unsurprisingly two people who moonlight on Independent SAGE.
I do wonder what the members of SAGE think of a few members deciding to then go and moonlight on another committee who usually take a very public view on opposing most of SAGE advice / government decisions based on their advice.
The "experts" as Guardian calls them are psychologists and educationalists by looks of the quotes and so on. Are they really experts in the evolution of viral mutations? Me thinks not.
Michie isn’t even much of an expert in child psychology, having had to read one of her books.
To be fair, having met a number of child psychologists, a non-trivial proportion do not know anything about children psychology.
The surprising implication of that comment is that you have met a substantial proportion who do know something about child psychology
There is a serious point which is how much confidence we should place in the expert opinions of social psychologists, behavioural scientists and similar. My opinion would be not a lot and much less than we would place in the opinions of experts in areas with a decent track record for predictions and developing things that work.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
No. If the indigenes of the planet Tharg which circles a main sequence sun in Cassiopeia are cruelly enslaved by their insectoid Q'rr'om overlords, in principle I'm against that, but equally it is not my fucking problem, squire. I don't live in a country where the police shoot black men, or vote for a party which advocates a policy along those lines. What we are looking at is wannabe transatlanticism like Jagger's American accent in the 60s. Anyone feeling strongly about it is welcome to take a flight to philadelphia and punch a cop in the face.
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
No sign of a queue at the "mass" vaccination event at the Town Hall today so have we reached maximum take-up in Newham? I'd like to hope not but that looks a thoroughly miserable figure compared to the national numbers.
On topic: I think these polls are a clear case of people saying one thing and doing another. The evidence is all around us.
COVID restrictions are like taxes...when polled everybody says yes we definitely need more and tighter rules, but wait just not that rule for me....government are a disgrace, they should have shut the border, but I want my foreign summer holiday etc.
You often say that, but largely I think it's different people. I know a range of people (of various political views) who favour extending lockdown, and generally they are consistent about wearing masks, staying at home as far as possible, and avoiding close contact. I also know a number of people who feel pretty much as you do - they think lockdown has gone on too long and it's time to relax. But I don't actually know anyone who simultaneously wants lockdown for others while objecting to it for themselves.
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
It isn't a case of a split, as you suggest. I think it is more a case of: at a theoretical level people support restrictions, but their ability to cope with incoherant rules that curtail freedom has been exhausted. For instance: at my son's school none of the parents wear masks any more when picking up/dropping off their kids, even though that is in the rules. They might say that they support restrictions, but they cannot follow the rules. It is not that suprising, humans are full of contradictions.
I think people are no longer sure what the rules are, which one could take as a sign of exhaustion. I was debating with a friend whether we were allowed to give each other a friendly hug, and we dutifully looked it up on my phone. It felt rather like those US colleges where you have to sign an agreement before kissing anyone. (In case anyone else is unsure, a "cautious cuddle" is permitted, whatever that means.)
If the Government offers no more than half a dozen rules to be followed after July 19, I think most people will go along with that. But I am not confident of Johnson's ability to take a position and stick to it.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
Just simply pointing out that the knee was a feature of sporting events first.
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
This thought has crossed my mind. Given schools have been open as much as possible, I’d like to think it would be a given that whether to vaccinate under 18s would have no bearing on unlocking.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
Just simply pointing out that the knee was a feature of sporting events first.
Sorry if that reply seemed unnecessarily aggressive.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
If we are a free country, then if the players want to take a knee that is their right, and if some people want to boo that is their right.
To have a preference that people either dont take the knee or dont boo are reasonable positions but making it a massive issue and "demanding" either side stop are both completely out of proportion and run counter to the idea of a free society.
Did you see my original post? I said I would avoid being present because although I don’t agree with it I said it is the players choice and I would not be getting involved in disputes in the ground.
It was hard to avoid being present when England players took the knee last night because it only took about five seconds immediately before kick-off. Not enough time to nip out and put the kettle on.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
If we are a free country, then if the players want to take a knee that is their right, and if some people want to boo that is their right.
To have a preference that people either dont take the knee or dont boo are reasonable positions but making it a massive issue and "demanding" either side stop are both completely out of proportion and run counter to the idea of a free society.
Did you see my original post? I said I would avoid being present because although I don’t agree with it I said it is the players choice and I would not be getting involved in disputes in the ground.
It was hard to avoid being present when England players took the knee last night because it only took about five seconds immediately before kick-off. Not enough time to nip out and put the kettle on.
I will just take an extra minute to finish my last pre match pint in the bar in the ground. Save being enmeshed in the unpleasantness which is likely to occur.
Bedfordshire: Admissions and total patients flat for about the last month, at less than 10% of the January peak; ventilation beds negligible.
Bolton: Admissions, total patients and ventilation beds all had two peaks (late May and early June.) Patients peaked at about a third of levels in January, ventilation beds were closer to previous peaks but the total number was low, at about a dozen. All three indicators now in steady decline for the last few weeks.
East Lancashire (covers Blackburn): Hospital admissions peaked at about 10% of the January peak in mid-June, hospital patients at 20% and ventilation beds at about 40%. Admissions running broadly flat in the high single-figures per day, other indicators have declined.
Manchester: Admissions broadly flat since mid-June and running at about a third of January peak. Hospital patient total about a third of January peak, rate of increase has slowed since mid-June and may be levelling off. Ventilation beds at about half of January peak (20 at last known date) and may still be rising gradually.
Leeds: Patient total has tripled, from a very low base, in the last month and is now at just shy of 10% of the November peak. Admissions in low single figures and either flat or increasing slightly. Ventilation beds negligible.
Scotland: Still increasing, daily admissions currently running at about 30% of January peak, total hospital patients at about 15%, ventilation beds flat or rising marginally.
Wales: Ventilation beds negligible, admissions very low and possibly falling, hospital patient total constant at about 40 (2% of January peak) for the past month.
London: Admissions broadly flat at less than 5% of the daily rate for the January peak; possible signs of a slight increase in the most recent numbers but too soon to tell. Total patient count up by only about 100 over the whole of the last month and still at less than 5% of January peak. Ventilation beds approximately doubled in the last month but still at only just over 5% of January peak.
Cornwall: Patients at about 10% of January peak, admissions and ventilation beds too low to discern a definite trend.
And in my neck of the woods...
Cambridge: three patients in hospital, numbers all at or close to zero since May.
Overall, if Delta is going to cricket bat the NHS then there is precious little sign of it.
UK Minister James Dudderidge mistakes Zambia for Zimbabwe at KK's funeral. Either he is not very bright, lazy and ignorant or is supremely anti-woke, and he has picked up some serious brownie points for pretending he didn't know the difference.
Well at least he didn't call it Northern Rhodesia.
KK was one of the best of Africa's post independence leaders. Mrs Foxy had a very happy childhood under his rule. Bit stupid of the minister to not know what country he was in. Global Britain...
The dog that did not bark in the Sunday papers: no lurid revelations about Michael Gove.
It is just about possible that he and the wife simply got fed up of living together and that no third parties or scandals are involved. It does happen.
The dog that did not bark in the Sunday papers: no lurid revelations about Michael Gove.
It is just about possible that he and the wife simply got fed up of living together and that no third parties or scandals are involved. It does happen.
They remind me a bit of that wonderfully acid comment by Samuel Butler: ‘how good of God to make Thomas and Jane Carlyle marry each other, and so make only two people miserable instead of four.’
No sign of a queue at the "mass" vaccination event at the Town Hall today so have we reached maximum take-up in Newham? I'd like to hope not but that looks a thoroughly miserable figure compared to the national numbers.
If Delta is going to precipitate a massacre in London then all I can say is it's taking its time getting started. Is it simply possible that so many people have already had Covid that most of the unvaccinated are either repelling Delta successfully, or not suffering symptoms if reinfected?
Don’t worry, the SAJ is going to save us from the zerovidians
‘Javid said: “We need to be clear that cases are going to rise significantly. I know many people will be cautious about the easing of restrictions – that’s completely understandable. But no date we choose will ever come without risk, so we have to take a broad and balanced view.
“We are going to have to learn to accept the existence of Covid and find ways to cope with it – just as we already do with flu.”’
This eminently sensible statement was then completely misrepresented and skewed by, yes, some idiot Little Hitler scientist from Scotland
‘Reacting to the comments, Prof Stephen Reicher at the University of St Andrews, a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science, tweeted: “It is frightening to have a ‘health’ secretary who still thinks Covid is flu’
THAT’S NOT WHAT JAVID SAID AND YOU KNOW IT
At some point the more irresponsible scientists need punishing. This guy would be a good place to start
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
This thought has crossed my mind. Given schools have been open as much as possible, I’d like to think it would be a given that whether to vaccinate under 18s would have no bearing on unlocking.
My personal take is that as schools will be out at or around unlocking day, anyway, I’d expect infection rates to drop in youngsters, buying quite a bit of time to offer them vaccination without needing to extend restrictions.
Then again, I’m a bit biased. Two of my nieces are currently forbidden from being vaxxed; one becomes eligible in late July (and will grab it then); the other is nearly two years short as it stands.
1) Buy some pork belly. 2) Score the skin/fat. 3) Buy a bag of sage at the supermarket. Put it in the blender (remove the plastic bag and the rubber band, unless you like the flavour). Put 5 big garlic cloves in the blender, and about 50ml of olive oil. Blend until you have a uniform mess. 4) Rub the blended up stuff (Marinade if you are a Remainer) into the pork. Put it in a container over night, with the rest of the blender up stuff poured over it. Put it in the fridge 5) Drink yourself unconscious.
The next day
1) fire up the oven to 200c 2) Put the pork in, skin up. 3) Put the "Sound Barrier" by David Lean on. 4) At the time that Ralph Richardson gives his brand new son in law a job as a test pilot at the funeral for his actual son, (30 min) turn the oven down to 160c 5) Watch the rest of the film 6) Start "Ice Cold In Alex". At about the time the they meet the German patro (40 minutes into Ice Cold in Alex), turn the heat back up to 220. This should be about 2 hours of cooking at the 160c 6) At the point where they are digging the grave (1 hour into the film), turn the oven off and take the meat out to rest. 7) when they start voicing their suspicions to each other about the South African chap taking repeated walks in the desert - 1:15 into the movie - it's ready
No sign of a queue at the "mass" vaccination event at the Town Hall today so have we reached maximum take-up in Newham? I'd like to hope not but that looks a thoroughly miserable figure compared to the national numbers.
If Delta is going to precipitate a massacre in London then all I can say is it's taking its time getting started. Is it simply possible that so many people have already had Covid that most of the unvaccinated are either repelling Delta successfully, or not suffering symptoms if reinfected?
I just think that most of the population denominators used to determine percentage vaccinations are just cr*p. Even taking into account the generally younger populations which one would expect to result in London “lagging” there are areas which appear to have take-up levels some way below what you would expect.
Even if the rules weren't an inchoate, incoherent mass of inconsistency, people would still eventually tire of following them anyway. The surprise is that the line has largely been held as long as it has. What would have slowly crumbled naturally has largely just been blown apart in the past few weeks by the sporting summer with Wimbledon (to a lesser extent) and the football (to a greater extent) and e.g. the GP to come. Following some fiddly 2m distancing rules or negotiating the one-way system in the shop when you watch 50,000 cheering fans at Wembley or whatever it is does feel a bit silly.
For what it's worth, I think the behavioural experts will need to find a way to manage a similar sort of fatigue with the whole "climate emergency" thing. That title (which I'm not arguing is not warranted) will get some headlines and some initial attention for a bit of time, but people can't comprehend a state of emergency that will last the rest of their lives, and their children's lives, and probably the lives of their children's children too. At some point it just becomes the way things are, even if people are well meaning in it.
I’m in a pintxo restaurant in Soller, Majorca. Excellent food, inventive and tasty and clever without stupid ‘foams’
And Soller prawns are indeed brilliant, I have discovered. I love Spanish food, it is the best in the West at the moment
More importantly, it’s BUZZING. Lots of Brits here in particular. You can’t get a table for 3 days. (I only got one coz I’m prepared to eat before midnight, unlike Spaniards). And I eat at 8, unlike the Germans who dine at about 5pm
But how splendid. Life is returning to Europe. Blood flows through the veins of our ancient civilisation. The wine flows. The beer is spilled. England are going to beat Denmark
That is mass non-compliance. Totally out of whack with the polling that ask people if they support tough rules on COVID. So clearly there is a significant proportion of hypocrites out there.
That is from last September, although I can’t imagine the proportion has risen since.
My point was Nick said where was getting my opinion that a substantial number of people have been somewhat hypocrital when on one hand calling for tougher / existing covid rules.
The government own advisors have repeatedly shown evidence of this. Its been true throughout not just now. Every time something is advisable, large numbera of people take the piss, then they have to come up with further rules e.g. scotch egg substantial meal nonsense.
Remember Boris said can you use some common sense please, people didn't, he announced pubs need to close from this evening, 10,000s of people piled in the pub.
The public are still evenly split on meaning of knee taking..
'Taking the knee' is...
A political statement that goes beyond simply expressing opposition to racism: 40% An apolitical statement that simply expresses opposition to racism and nothing more: 39% Don't know: 21%
It can be what you want it to be. The origins of course were certainly political.
I suppose being opposed to racism is a political statement.
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
The situation in the USA is completely different to that in the UK. Do we take on board political scenarios and protests from anywhere around the world? The English FA already had “kick it out”.
No. If the indigenes of the planet Tharg which circles a main sequence sun in Cassiopeia are cruelly enslaved by their insectoid Q'rr'om overlords, in principle I'm against that, but equally it is not my fucking problem, squire. I don't live in a country where the police shoot black men, or vote for a party which advocates a policy along those lines. What we are looking at is wannabe transatlanticism like Jagger's American accent in the 60s. Anyone feeling strongly about it is welcome to take a flight to philadelphia and punch a cop in the face.
The dog that did not bark in the Sunday papers: no lurid revelations about Michael Gove.
It is just about possible that he and the wife simply got fed up of living together and that no third parties or scandals are involved. It does happen.
I have some personal insight into this. And I can confirm it. Feel free to disbelieve me, ofc
There are some scandalous details but nothing like the lurid stuff on Twitter
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
This thought has crossed my mind. Given schools have been open as much as possible, I’d like to think it would be a given that whether to vaccinate under 18s would have no bearing on unlocking.
My personal take is that as schools will be out at or around unlocking day, anyway, I’d expect infection rates to drop in youngsters, buying quite a bit of time to offer them vaccination without needing to extend restrictions.
Then again, I’m a bit biased. Two of my nieces are currently forbidden from being vaxxed; one becomes eligible in late July (and will grab it then); the other is nearly two years short as it stands.
A neighbour of mine who is a doctor working in Pakistan is planning to rejoin his wife in the UK next week but because of restrictions he is having to come back via New York where anyone can pay $75 and get a Pfizer jab on the spot. He's had two Chinese jabs but they're not good enough to get you into Europe.
Is this capitalism at its finest?
No - it’s the requirement that there is sufficient evidence that a vaccine works before it is approved by the Mhra
Doesn’t look likely we will ever have such evidence for the Chinese vaccines, because all the evidence is they don’t work.
I thought one was supposed to be pretty good, and the other not so much. “Does not work” is also a relative term - remember when vaccines were first being mooted aspirations were for 50+ effectiveness (something akin to regular flu vaccines) being a target. The effectiveness of the best vaccines may have completely changed perceptions about what can be achieved - I wonder if there is any reason to think perhaps the flu vaccines of the future may be massively better? But the problem we have is that WHO is pretty much sticking to the 50% (+safe) threshold for recommendation.
Kate Bingham, head of UK vaccine taskforce said she would have been happy at anything above 40% effectiveness. They are pretty remarkable vaccines.
There are various numbers to look at -
1) protection against catching COVID 2) protection against hospitalisation 3) protection against death from COVID
2 & 3 turned out to be remarkable for as number of vaccines - 1 is much lower. Hence the current situation - cases soaring, hospitalisation and deaths not so much.
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
This thought has crossed my mind. Given schools have been open as much as possible, I’d like to think it would be a given that whether to vaccinate under 18s would have no bearing on unlocking.
My personal take is that as schools will be out at or around unlocking day, anyway, I’d expect infection rates to drop in youngsters, buying quite a bit of time to offer them vaccination without needing to extend restrictions.
Then again, I’m a bit biased. Two of my nieces are currently forbidden from being vaxxed; one becomes eligible in late July (and will grab it then); the other is nearly two years short as it stands.
Do you have to be 18+ to consent to having a jab?
I think Foxy thought 16+ as per Gillick Competency rules.
Even if the rules weren't an inchoate, incoherent mass of inconsistency, people would still eventually tire of following them anyway. The surprise is that the line has largely been held as long as it has. What would have slowly crumbled naturally has largely just been blown apart in the past few weeks by the sporting summer with Wimbledon (to a lesser extent) and the football (to a greater extent) and e.g. the GP to come. Following some fiddly 2m distancing rules or negotiating the one-way system in the shop when you watch 50,000 cheering fans at Wembley or whatever it is does feel a bit silly.
For what it's worth, I think the behavioural experts will need to find a way to manage a similar sort of fatigue with the whole "climate emergency" thing. That title (which I'm not arguing is not warranted) will get some headlines and some initial attention for a bit of time, but people can't comprehend a state of emergency that will last the rest of their lives, and their children's lives, and probably the lives of their children's children too. At some point it just becomes the way things are, even if people are well meaning in it.
I think this is quite right, especially the surprise the line has held this long. It's been impressive (and for some, worrying).
The climate thing encounters some issues already, as the perceived need to ephasise the emergency means many of the more vigorous and passionate campaigners make no allowance for anything achieved to date, which combined with the need to do everything right away or the planet is doomed, can exhaust some people inclined to support it into apathy, since what's the point?
I’m in a pintxo restaurant in Soller, Majorca. Excellent food, inventive and tasty and clever without stupid ‘foams’
And Soller prawns are indeed brilliant, I have discovered. I love Spanish food, it is the best in the West at the moment
More importantly, it’s BUZZING. Lots of Brits here in particular. You can’t get a table for 3 days. (I only got one coz I’m prepared to eat before midnight, unlike Spaniards). And I eat at 8, unlike the Germans who dine at about 5pm
But how splendid. Life is returning to Europe. Blood flows through the veins of our ancient civilisation. The wine flows. The beer is spilled. England are going to beat Denmark
*burps*
I love Soller, excellent orange trees and railway to Las Palmas. Brilliant for entertaining small children in shit weather, or was 20 years ago.
I wonder if some also worry that vaccinating teens would be tied in with a delay to unlocking. Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
This thought has crossed my mind. Given schools have been open as much as possible, I’d like to think it would be a given that whether to vaccinate under 18s would have no bearing on unlocking.
My personal take is that as schools will be out at or around unlocking day, anyway, I’d expect infection rates to drop in youngsters, buying quite a bit of time to offer them vaccination without needing to extend restrictions.
Then again, I’m a bit biased. Two of my nieces are currently forbidden from being vaxxed; one becomes eligible in late July (and will grab it then); the other is nearly two years short as it stands.
Do you have to be 18+ to consent to having a jab?
16 is usual age of consent for medical procedures. Younger patients can consent, even over their parents feelings, if they have capacity.
The dog that did not bark in the Sunday papers: no lurid revelations about Michael Gove.
It is just about possible that he and the wife simply got fed up of living together and that no third parties or scandals are involved. It does happen.
I have some personal insight into this. And I can confirm it. Feel free to disbelieve me, ofc
There are some scandalous details but nothing like the lurid stuff on Twitter
Michael found Sarah's top of the end range artisanal dildos?
I’m in a pintxo restaurant in Soller, Majorca. Excellent food, inventive and tasty and clever without stupid ‘foams’
And Soller prawns are indeed brilliant, I have discovered. I love Spanish food, it is the best in the West at the moment
More importantly, it’s BUZZING. Lots of Brits here in particular. You can’t get a table for 3 days. (I only got one coz I’m prepared to eat before midnight, unlike Spaniards). And I eat at 8, unlike the Germans who dine at about 5pm
But how splendid. Life is returning to Europe. Blood flows through the veins of our ancient civilisation. The wine flows. The beer is spilled. England are going to beat Denmark
*burps*
Looks wonderful. Gets good reviews. Tapas with a twist?
Comments
Of course, the vaccines aren’t approved for under 12s...
And as I repeated ad infinitum, why in the NFL they said ok we hear you, and came up with a positive campaign that is totally unlinked to the extremes of BLM, Marxism, Defund Police, etc and which basically nobody has any issue with. Inspire Change is a much more positive message. It is still more "political" than I think would be acceptable to a lot of people in the UK, but the US has different problems.
You'd have to ask Foxy & Co. - but in general doctors don't admit patients to hospital for LOLs or to reduce annoyance from pushy parents.
I do wonder what is going to happen. As the Chinese and Russian vaccines are been widely used outside of Europe. Is international travel for those people going to be barred for years to come?
As others have said, these issues are actually finely-balanced, and the public are not generally experts, so it's mostly unfair to portray them as hypocrites. They're simply people with a different view, on the whole inclined to caution during uncertainty.
Cases at the same level as the end of October and on the same trend;
Hospitalisations very slightly above the level of last August and on a much gentler upward trend.
Even allowing for much wider testing finding more cases, that’s surely pretty conclusive evidence that the vaccines are doing what’s needed now.
I thought one was supposed to be pretty good, and the other not so much. “Does not work” is also a relative term - remember when vaccines were first being mooted aspirations were for 50+ effectiveness (something akin to regular flu vaccines) being a target. The effectiveness of the best vaccines may have completely changed perceptions about what can be achieved - I wonder if there is any reason to think perhaps the flu vaccines of the future may be massively better? But the problem we have is that WHO is pretty much sticking to the 50% (+safe) threshold for recommendation.
‘Javid said: “We need to be clear that cases are going to rise significantly. I know many people will be cautious about the easing of restrictions – that’s completely understandable. But no date we choose will ever come without risk, so we have to take a broad and balanced view.
“We are going to have to learn to accept the existence of Covid and find ways to cope with it – just as we already do with flu.”’
This eminently sensible statement was then completely misrepresented and skewed by, yes, some idiot Little Hitler scientist from Scotland
‘Reacting to the comments, Prof Stephen Reicher at the University of St Andrews, a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science, tweeted: “It is frightening to have a ‘health’ secretary who still thinks Covid is flu’
THAT’S NOT WHAT JAVID SAID AND YOU KNOW IT
At some point the more irresponsible scientists need punishing. This guy would be a good place to start
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/04/uk-scientists-caution-that-lifting-of-covid-rules-is-like-building-variant-factories?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
There are plenty of people in favour of house building who wouldn’t want them built across the road from them.
There are similarly surely lots of people who ‘support’ continuing with lifestyle restrictions for others, confident that they’ll be able to continue making their own choices without fear that any contravention of the regulations is ever likely to seriously be enforced.
As even the government’s useful idiot minister Jenrick was forced to admit on this morning’s #Marr, we have arrived at the point where people need to be trusted to make their own informed choices.
Of course, there will be those that make the wrong choice and end up facing (or their family or friends facing) the consequences of their mistake.
But that’s the way it always used to go for many aspects of life.
It’s time for us to return to normality and get the government out of trying to dictate (without enforcement) who can visit our home or how many people we can meet or what precautions we must take before going about our normal lives.
The fact that the Chinese version is an inferior product and ultimately more expensive hasn’t stopped them dominating many industrial fields, of course.
This has further been backed up by looking at when we have had lockdowns, and it has been shown the first few days at the start and the last few days at the end, the percentage of those sticking to the rules is significantly lower.
Its well reported people have been flying to different locations to avoid quarantine hotels. The "non-essential travel", loads of people went to the Middle East or the Caribbean "on-business" around Christmas / Early January, they went to India (and that is how we got the delta variant well seeded).
The government tried the please use your common sense, minimize this and that, and people went well the rules don't say I can't....and the government then had to bring in rules to stop it.
Look at the football viewing, you think people are sticking to the rules? Staying at their table, in their little pen, no hugging random strangers? Are they bollocks. This isn't 1 or 2 Hancocks, its 1000s and 1000s....hence why Scotland vs England game now has 1000s of new cases.
We hosted a number of artists’ stalls at an open studios event today. The local artists were generally very cautious about Covid restrictions and mask wearing, and we had the NHS track and trace code to scan in as you entered, arrows for one way system, please wear a mask signs etc.
Once things got going. Well, I’d say 2/3s of people did generally stick with the masks, but the contemporary dance of the one way system? Nobody. And virtually nobody signed into the NHS app.
The fact is most adults are now double vaccinated, so they are simply not scared anymore. They know at heart that their risk is now the same risk as flu. They still do their bit to protect the vulnerable, but they’re clearly in the post-exam, end of term mindset now.
And why we should all be intensely relaxed.
Are you able to easily do the same for case-to-ventilators?
For all of that to happen without vaccines being the cause - well, I would like someone to have a go at a convincing counter argument. I can't think of one.
Eric Topol
@EricTopol
·
24m
Replying to
@EricTopol
Test positivity in Arkansas now 15%
Missouri 11%
Nevada 10%
National average is 2.3%
Taking the knee was introduced to modern life by Colin Kaepernick at sporting events as a statement against racism.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/11/less-than-20-of-people-in-england-self-isolate-fully-sage-says
That is mass non-compliance. Totally out of whack with the polling that ask people if they support tough rules on COVID. So clearly there is a significant proportion of hypocrites out there.
To have a preference that people either dont take the knee or dont boo are reasonable positions but making it a massive issue and "demanding" either side stop are both completely out of proportion and run counter to the idea of a free society.
Thanks.
UK Minister James Dudderidge mistakes Zambia for Zimbabwe at KK's funeral. Either he is not very bright, lazy and ignorant or is supremely anti-woke, and he has picked up some serious brownie points for pretending he didn't know the difference.
Well at least he didn't call it Northern Rhodesia.
However it seems we need higher productivity
“Should we forbid them from getting the vaccine if desired?”
Because that’s actually what we’re talking about. It’s not proposed to be compulsory, so what we’re discussing is whether we should continue to refuse those who want it.
Ensure that the risks are borne in mind (and I dislike it when they aren’t compared equally: the possible few per million risk of pericarditis from the vaccine seen as far greater than the order of magnitude greater (or two orders of magnitude) risk of exactly the same thing from covid. Or other causes of hospitalisation.
Yet the latter is classed as “no measurable harm” whilst the former is too great?
To such a degree that (even ignoring long-term effects of covid on some), we will insist on forbidding it to these teens?
I’m not comfortable with that.
About 0.7%?
Even people who are overtly racist on occasion - who might use the N word in anger, or consider that such a race will never work as hard as others blah blah - would, I think, on reflection, believe that racism per se is BAD - as in apartheid South Africa or pre civil war USA - and should be opposed.
Put it another way, a lot of people are capable of stealing in multiple ways. From minor shop lifting to fiddling expenses or finding a way to access paywalled news sites without paying.
But very very few of them would say ‘I am not opposed to stealing’. Even tho they steal
So it’s a pretty meaningless statement
Would opinions be different if these were explicitly disconnected? That is: “regardless of the level of rollout to teens, we will unlock on the 19th. Would you support offering the jab to teens who wanted it (with parental agreement)?”
1st dose: 54.5%
2nd dose: 33.1%
No sign of a queue at the "mass" vaccination event at the Town Hall today so have we reached maximum take-up in Newham? I'd like to hope not but that looks a thoroughly miserable figure compared to the national numbers.
If the Government offers no more than half a dozen rules to be followed after July 19, I think most people will go along with that. But I am not confident of Johnson's ability to take a position and stick to it.
Bedfordshire: Admissions and total patients flat for about the last month, at less than 10% of the January peak; ventilation beds negligible.
Bolton: Admissions, total patients and ventilation beds all had two peaks (late May and early June.) Patients peaked at about a third of levels in January, ventilation beds were closer to previous peaks but the total number was low, at about a dozen. All three indicators now in steady decline for the last few weeks.
East Lancashire (covers Blackburn): Hospital admissions peaked at about 10% of the January peak in mid-June, hospital patients at 20% and ventilation beds at about 40%. Admissions running broadly flat in the high single-figures per day, other indicators have declined.
Manchester: Admissions broadly flat since mid-June and running at about a third of January peak. Hospital patient total about a third of January peak, rate of increase has slowed since mid-June and may be levelling off. Ventilation beds at about half of January peak (20 at last known date) and may still be rising gradually.
Leeds: Patient total has tripled, from a very low base, in the last month and is now at just shy of 10% of the November peak. Admissions in low single figures and either flat or increasing slightly. Ventilation beds negligible.
Scotland: Still increasing, daily admissions currently running at about 30% of January peak, total hospital patients at about 15%, ventilation beds flat or rising marginally.
Wales: Ventilation beds negligible, admissions very low and possibly falling, hospital patient total constant at about 40 (2% of January peak) for the past month.
London: Admissions broadly flat at less than 5% of the daily rate for the January peak; possible signs of a slight increase in the most recent numbers but too soon to tell. Total patient count up by only about 100 over the whole of the last month and still at less than 5% of January peak. Ventilation beds approximately doubled in the last month but still at only just over 5% of January peak.
Cornwall: Patients at about 10% of January peak, admissions and ventilation beds too low to discern a definite trend.
And in my neck of the woods...
Cambridge: three patients in hospital, numbers all at or close to zero since May.
Overall, if Delta is going to cricket bat the NHS then there is precious little sign of it.
Ye gods.
Who comes up with this shite?
Enough.
(mind you, he did work at Deutsche...)
Then again, I’m a bit biased. Two of my nieces are currently forbidden from being vaxxed; one becomes eligible in late July (and will grab it then); the other is nearly two years short as it stands.
Ingredients
- Pork belly
- Sage
- Salt
- Olive oil
- Alcohol
The night before
1) Buy some pork belly.
2) Score the skin/fat.
3) Buy a bag of sage at the supermarket. Put it in the blender (remove the plastic bag and the rubber band, unless you like the flavour). Put 5 big garlic cloves in the blender, and about 50ml of olive oil. Blend until you have a uniform mess.
4) Rub the blended up stuff (Marinade if you are a Remainer) into the pork. Put it in a container over night, with the rest of the blender up stuff poured over it. Put it in the fridge
5) Drink yourself unconscious.
The next day
1) fire up the oven to 200c
2) Put the pork in, skin up.
3) Put the "Sound Barrier" by David Lean on.
4) At the time that Ralph Richardson gives his brand new son in law a job as a test pilot at the funeral for his actual son, (30 min) turn the oven down to 160c
5) Watch the rest of the film
6) Start "Ice Cold In Alex". At about the time the they meet the German patro (40 minutes into Ice Cold in Alex), turn the heat back up to 220. This should be about 2 hours of cooking at the 160c
6) At the point where they are digging the grave (1 hour into the film), turn the oven off and take the meat out to rest.
7) when they start voicing their suspicions to each other about the South African chap taking repeated walks in the desert - 1:15 into the movie - it's ready
For what it's worth, I think the behavioural experts will need to find a way to manage a similar sort of fatigue with the whole "climate emergency" thing. That title (which I'm not arguing is not warranted) will get some headlines and some initial attention for a bit of time, but people can't comprehend a state of emergency that will last the rest of their lives, and their children's lives, and probably the lives of their children's children too. At some point it just becomes the way things are, even if people are well meaning in it.
And Soller prawns are indeed brilliant, I have discovered. I love Spanish food, it is the best in the West at the moment
More importantly, it’s BUZZING. Lots of Brits here in particular. You can’t get a table for 3 days. (I only got one coz I’m prepared to eat before midnight, unlike Spaniards). And I eat at 8, unlike the Germans who dine at about 5pm
But how splendid. Life is returning to Europe. Blood flows through the veins of our ancient civilisation. The wine flows. The beer is spilled. England are going to beat Denmark
*burps*
Got
and
The government own advisors have repeatedly shown evidence of this. Its been true throughout not just now. Every time something is advisable, large numbera of people take the piss, then they have to come up with further rules e.g. scotch egg substantial meal nonsense.
Remember Boris said can you use some common sense please, people didn't, he announced pubs need to close from this evening, 10,000s of people piled in the pub.
There are some scandalous details but nothing like the lurid stuff on Twitter
1) protection against catching COVID
2) protection against hospitalisation
3) protection against death from COVID
2 & 3 turned out to be remarkable for as number of vaccines - 1 is much lower. Hence the current situation - cases soaring, hospitalisation and deaths not so much.
The climate thing encounters some issues already, as the perceived need to ephasise the emergency means many of the more vigorous and passionate campaigners make no allowance for anything achieved to date, which combined with the need to do everything right away or the planet is doomed, can exhaust some people inclined to support it into apathy, since what's the point?