With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in terms? If they were mostly fibbing, all you did in giving them a ring and if need be a lift was helping your opponents ...?
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Using the sources *you* selected, here is a scatter chart of birth rates against religiosity for the fifteen largest European countries.
Using your own data sources, it literally shows exactly the opposite of what you claim. Higher religiosity correlates with lower birthrates.
Edit to add: that dot in the top right, that's Romania that is. You took the single biggest outlier, and claimed it was trend.
Which is irrelevant as every one of the 15 largest European countries have a religiosity rate below the global average and a birthrate below replacement rate.
The bottom nation by birthrate ie South Korea at 0.8, has only 43% of their population saying religion is important to them
So, you're saying that data doesn't matter, unless it happens to agree with you.
Got it.
Have you scatter plotted the world and run a linear regression? If not, you are literally just making up numbers and claiming they match your existing views.
I thought family size was driven by infant mortality / survival to adulthood with a 1 generation lag
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
People have put the case on here for the benefits of canvassing, and in a genuinely extremely tight contest I can perhaps see it having an effect, but given parties often seem no better at picking up major shifts in support than anyone else, and you can big changes in areas without significant canvassing too, I confess my default view is that many of those who have done a lot of canvassing cannot help but assume their efforts have been much more impactful than is in fact the case (or more useful for info gathering purposes than is the case), and that they are too close to the activity to accept that as a possibility.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Have you tried suggesting that due to these factors if they won’t buy you a monitor they will need to buy you an iPad Pro to work on instead?
Given that when you are in hospital, your freedoms are drastically curtailed (you can’t even up and leave whenever desired, or pop out for a restaurant meal, or whatever), and that when you are in hospital, you are subjected to whatever injections and interventions they give you without even giving an exhaustive ingredients list (and, let’s face it, may even have side effects), surely those who reject vaccination on the grounds of freedom or mistrusting what the medical staff are prescribing should never go to hospital, anyway?
I mean, even if gasping for air, or facing severe illness or injury, there’s surely a principle involved. Going in to hospital sacrifices your freedom and puts you into the power of medical professionals who may not be up to speed with the latest youtube videos or lockdown sceptics articles.
Unless their principles turn out to be non-absolute, anyway, in which case why not bloody get the vaccinations in the first place?
Just finished my LibDems selection interview for next year's council election. I want to be selected in a ward we would need a miracle to win but would be amazing to campaign in...
I have a healthy respect for (virtually) anyone who puts themselves up for election, whichever party. It's throwing yourself to the wolves (worse for MPs compared to councillors, but even then...). Even if I felt I had the skills to be an elected politician, I wouldn't have the personal courage.
Good luck.
I absolutely hate canvassing, even though I put myself through it for most general elections.
There's nothing more terrifying than knocking on a total strangers door and asking for their vote, without quite knowing what sort of reception you're going to get.
Me too and even more ghastly when you’re the candidate! I raised no objection when we did virtually none in May, citing COVID. Might have been a factor in the increased majority. Keep O’Reilly away from the punters - it’s for his own good.
Congrats on the majority, John. I do like it, though I think it only makes a marginal difference (not always a good difference, as you say ). I've been doing it all over Britain at every election since 1966 and I've only met hostile residents twice (not counting numerous "Nah" "Not interested" responses). They're probably more scared of you than vice versa - you know where they live! People don't like being nasty to a stranger on their doorstep.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
All over a £20 mount?.....
You should really get yourself a decent monitor, once you do, you will never know you managed without it. Not just meaning your eyes aren't screwed, but a 34 or 38" ultrawides are just awesome when you need loads of different documents / coding screens open at the same time.
As ever, it would be useful to know how much of the serious disease burden is down to the fully vaccinated, the partially vaccinated, and the unvaccinated.
Is it still mostly refusers clogging up the wards where you are?
I am still on holiday, but when I was last in the wards were 50/50; the ICU 95% unvaxxed, about half of our ICU capacity and stopping a lot of major surgery.
Has anyone modelled how quickly delta will burn through the unvaxxed twats this summer/autumn?
Presumably, there is a pretty low finite limit to the number of unvaxxed (10%?), so the bug is running out of tinder for ICU?
Not insofar as I'm aware.
10% of the adult population is, needless to say, a LOT of people (somewhere in excess of five million.) The obvious threat is that Delta keeps finding more and more of them, and we all end up locked down for months as a result.
I'm not prepared to lockdown to protect the unvaxxed. And I certainly don't think we can close schools yet again to protect these idiots.
I know, I know, and personally if things get that bad I'd be all in favour of doing... various things to them that aren't repeatable here. But the problem is, if anti-vaxxer illnesses pose a material risk of burning down the healthcare system come the back end of the year, does the will exist to implement alternatives apart from universal restrictions to stop that from happening, and do the means?
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
All over £20?.....
I don't know about the private sector, but in the public sector you will find it significantly harder to get approval for trivial amounts of additional spending compared to spending in the millions.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in terms? If they were mostly fibbing, all you did in giving them a ring and if need be a lift was helping your opponents ...?
I guess it is - I suppose that it must work otherwise parties would not do it. It didn't change my impression that people were lying to me.
The problem is probably with me - I'm obviously not cut out for politics.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in terms? If they were mostly fibbing, all you did in giving them a ring and if need be a lift was helping your opponents ...?
I suppose that it must work otherwise parties would not do it.
Whether canvassing serves a genuinely useful function or not I would not assume the above is true as a general statement.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
Personally (and this comes back to my preferring process to outcomes), abortion should not have been legalized through the back door of Roe vs Wade. It should have been legalized by voters in ballot boxes.
But I think that the Supreme Court would be utterly bonkers not to strike this down. Because if this mechanism is legal, it pretty much gives state legislatures the power to completely overrule the Federal Government, the Supreme Court and even the constitution itself.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
All over a £20 mount?.....
You should really get yourself a decent monitor, once you do, you will never know you managed without it. Not just meaning your eyes aren't screwed, but a 34 or 38" ultrawides are just awesome when you need loads of different documents / coding screens open at the same time.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Does your firm have an EHS department, and can you recruit them to hit the IT department over the head?
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
Personally (and this comes back to my preferring process to outcomes), abortion should not have been legalized through the back door of Roe vs Wade. It should have been legalized by voters in ballot boxes.
But I think that the Supreme Court would be utterly bonkers not to strike this down. Because if this mechanism is legal, it pretty much gives state legislatures the power to completely overrule the Federal Government, the Supreme Court and even the constitution itself.
Institutions are not known for their acceptance of arguments undermining their own authority and power.
I don't know. If I were a vegan I would be pretty hacked if I came a little late to the dining place and found the bloodstained meateaters had guzzled all the tofu, leaving only ceviche and steak tartare on the menu du jour.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction in terms? If they were mostly fibbing, all you did in giving them a ring and if need be a lift was helping your opponents ...?
The problem is probably with me - I'm obviously not cut out for politics.
Based on that alone we can expect your appointment to the Cabinet in the coming weeks?
I went to a Korean restaurant when I was in America. No dog on the menu, but I ate the most disgusting food ever.
It was called Tofu. It looked like congealed snot and was tasteless. I hear there's people in the UK who eat it on a regular basis. Chacun son gout, as the French say, and for good reason.
There are people who live to eat and people who eat to live. There is a third category - people who dislike the idea of enjoying food so much that they eat tofu.
There is a Chinese restaurant in Dubai, in part of the big Jumeriah complex, and it's named after some famous explorer.
They do this incredibly light, fluffy tofu that is flash fried, so it is crispy on the outside and soft and silky on the inside. It's then tossed with spring onions and a bunch of other spices.
It is a genuinely great dish, flavoursome and complex.
I admit that almost every other time I've been served tofu, I've been disappointed.
Cooking tofu so that it is not rubbish is a really tricky skill that I've only just got the hang of.
Do tell? Marinade, frying it hard enough to give texture?
I'm doing everything in a Le Creuset Signature Enamelled Cast Iron Pan so, you know, you need minimum standards to enter.
Cooking Firm tofu. Squeeze the block with kitchen roll and get as much moisture out as you can. After I cut into (big) cubes for frying I even squeeze them some more. Get. That. Moisture. Out. Of. There
No pre Marinade - every time I try it ends in disaster.
Big glug of oil in the pan and then get the oil temp hot, add in your cubes of tofu and then fight against every instinct and leave those fuckers. Do not touch them until you are absolutely sure they have got a crispy base (this is always longer then you think). Then you can carefully rotate them on their next side, after the first side has crisped it gets way easier and the Tofu loses it's tendency to stick.
Once cripsy on all side flash our your sauce/marinade and fry for 1-2 more minutes. I recommend something sweet and sticky and soy-ey.
Pretty much anything can be fried to make it edible. Even flying ants in my experience.
The key though with vegetarian cooking is not to expect it to be like cooking with meat. I am not vegetarian, but only eat meat a couple of times a week. Vegetarian cuisine can be delicious, indeed much Indian and Mediterranean food is already.
It's like cutting out salt, or sugar. At first everything tastes odd, but after a while tastebuds adjust, and appreciation is there without the overpowering taste of meat.
I sometimes cook Tofu for a change. Rather like mushrooms, it has almost no flavour of its own - so a tasty sauce is important.
Also useful perhaps if you want to substitute out carb (eg rice).
Mushrooms have flavour!
Fair point - but it absorbs other flavours beautifully.
As ever, it would be useful to know how much of the serious disease burden is down to the fully vaccinated, the partially vaccinated, and the unvaccinated.
Is it still mostly refusers clogging up the wards where you are?
I am still on holiday, but when I was last in the wards were 50/50; the ICU 95% unvaxxed, about half of our ICU capacity and stopping a lot of major surgery.
Has anyone modelled how quickly delta will burn through the unvaxxed twats this summer/autumn?
Presumably, there is a pretty low finite limit to the number of unvaxxed (10%?), so the bug is running out of tinder for ICU?
Not insofar as I'm aware.
10% of the adult population is, needless to say, a LOT of people (somewhere in excess of five million.) The obvious threat is that Delta keeps finding more and more of them, and we all end up locked down for months as a result.
I'm not prepared to lockdown to protect the unvaxxed. And I certainly don't think we can close schools yet again to protect these idiots.
I know, I know, and personally if things get that bad I'd be all in favour of doing... various things to them that aren't repeatable here. But the problem is, if anti-vaxxer illnesses pose a material risk of burning down the healthcare system come the back end of the year, does the will exist to implement alternatives apart from universal restrictions to stop that from happening, and do the means?
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
This was one of the best things about starting my own business: being able to choose any chair, any computer, basically just being able to buy whatever I want.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
People have put the case on here for the benefits of canvassing, and in a genuinely extremely tight contest I can perhaps see it having an effect, but given parties often seem no better at picking up major shifts in support than anyone else, and you can big changes in areas without significant canvassing too, I confess my default view is that many of those who have done a lot of canvassing cannot help but assume their efforts have been much more impactful than is in fact the case (or more useful for info gathering purposes than is the case), and that they are too close to the activity to accept that as a possibility.
Following a memory I thought about Jainism. Note that Jains are strict vegetarians. I suspect that most of those Brits who think of animals as our equals are thinking of pets, not their Sunday roast. i.e. are dicing with hypocrisy.
By contrast consider Jainism: I copied this clip from the web:
"Jains believe that animals and plants, as well as human beings, contain living souls. Each of these souls is considered of equal value and should be treated with respect and compassion. Jains are strict vegetarians and live in a way that minimises their use of the world's resources."
As ever, it would be useful to know how much of the serious disease burden is down to the fully vaccinated, the partially vaccinated, and the unvaccinated.
Is it still mostly refusers clogging up the wards where you are?
I am still on holiday, but when I was last in the wards were 50/50; the ICU 95% unvaxxed, about half of our ICU capacity and stopping a lot of major surgery.
Has anyone modelled how quickly delta will burn through the unvaxxed twats this summer/autumn?
Presumably, there is a pretty low finite limit to the number of unvaxxed (10%?), so the bug is running out of tinder for ICU?
Not insofar as I'm aware.
10% of the adult population is, needless to say, a LOT of people (somewhere in excess of five million.) The obvious threat is that Delta keeps finding more and more of them, and we all end up locked down for months as a result.
I'm not prepared to lockdown to protect the unvaxxed. And I certainly don't think we can close schools yet again to protect these idiots.
I know, I know, and personally if things get that bad I'd be all in favour of doing... various things to them that aren't repeatable here. But the problem is, if anti-vaxxer illnesses pose a material risk of burning down the healthcare system come the back end of the year, does the will exist to implement alternatives apart from universal restrictions to stop that from happening, and do the means?
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
The French system seems to have converted quite a few anti-vaxxers.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
This was one of the best things about starting my own business: being able to choose any chair, any computer, basically just being able to buy whatever I want.
I was going to say the same thing, then I remember Mrs U giving me all sorts of grief about how much I had spent on it when we moved into our current house....but I politely pointed out all the le creuset pans that were also purchased, because apparently cheap ones from Tesco's just aren't the same (i never had any problem when I lived on my own they get hot, they cook stuff...but apparently not)... like my monitors, chair and desk....
As in lots of emotive spheres, there's a danger of letting ourselves be defined by extremes. Most people are at least somewhat uneasy about factory farming and would be pleased if conditions improved. Few people are absolutely solid vegan, even fewer prefer ants to people. But the National Food Strategy recommends a 30% reduction on meat consumption on climate change grounds, and if that was nudged along by some subsidies for healthy alternatives, I don't think many people would really grumble.
You're a fanatic and are simply trying to nudge people along in baby steps to a world with no meat.
I can read you like a book.
CR was that serious or just having a bit of fun with NP?
Hmm. Partly serious, I'm afraid. NP is a nice guy but there's a reason he's a master of playing Diplomacy.
He uses politeness and reasonability as weapons to cloak the advance of his agenda, and I find that slightly deceptive.
The trouble is, of course, it makes you look like the unreasonable one if you call it out - but it's definitely there.
I'm not a vegan, CR, I feel I should be but... So I'm doing pretty much what I recommended - having a few meat-free meals a week and gradually increasing the number as I get used to them. And I try to make sure I'm eating high-welfare meat where I do. My big hope is lab-grown meat, which really is meat but doesn't involve killing an animal to enjoy it. If that proves economically viable, I think it'd be perverse to insist that something has to die to make it "proper meat".
But I'll plead guilty to the general charge - I try to be the most reasonable-sounding person in the room, and there's an element of deliberate policy in that, because it does help persuade the undecided. I wouldn't exactly say deception, because it reflects my self-image as rational - I don't have opinions that I've not persuaded "myself" are reasonable (yeah, we're all good at persuading ourselves), so I'm just putting the arguments that persuaded me. Also, especially on a forum where we chat for pleasure like this, it's no fun to be screaming at each other.
An honest post. I don't think veganism is anything but a quasi-religious ideology driven by purity so I do hope you don't go down that road.
I'm not arguing for anyone to be screaming at anyone else, just for people to be transparent about their intent and agenda.
Yes, fair enough. And although I think you've got a bit of a thing about vegans (I know lots from my work and they vary hugely, just like everyone), I really like what you wrote about the meat that you do eat. And, unsolicited compliment, I think your current Government is the best on this subject for many years.
Meaningful labelling would help (and I know Defra is working on that too). There was a brand of milk called "Pure" that I came across. Was it unusually pure? Organic? Free range? As far as I could work out, nah. It's just a brand name. And I remember going round an egg farm and asking the farmer what "fresh" actually meant. He chortled:- "It doesn't mean anything, mate, it's just marketing."
Would be interesting to know if the (admittedly rare) side effects from the jabs are still happening for 3rd jabs. If they were, I could understand the scientists' reluctance...
Out of interest, how many jabs are you prepared to take before you say feck this for a game of soldiers?
Because, possibly, your freedom will depend on it. Some of us are preparing ourselves to become second class citizens already.
If you don't get the booster, that could be you too.
On the contrary (sic) freedom is dependent on being vaccinated. Returning to normal life requires it.
Freedom based on vaccination will not be a 'return' to anything. It certainly won't be a return to normal life.
Only if you see 'death' as freedom for a substantial number of people ...
Vaccinated people can easily both get and pass on covid. Protection, as it is becoming increasingly clear, wanes after a few months.
Not easily. They possibly can but it's not easily.
Some unvaccinated people have had delta covid. The ONS shows that reinfection in these cases, and thus therefore the ability to pass covid on, is very low.
It would make far more sense, surely, to make antibody testing the yardstick, rather than vaccination? does it really matter how you acquire your protection?
Delta covid has only been around for eight months. It's only been common enough to be named as a subvariant for three or four months. Not really enough time for the smaller subset of unvaccinated people to get it twice.
I therefore treat your claim with suspicion. Do you have linkies to it, please?
And antibodies aren't the only way the body defeats Covid. The immune system is much more complex than that...
1) Studies from Israel have been having some slightly odd results recently. 2) Pfizer only. 3) A media report on one study.
So you wish me to continue?
The data from Israel is that Pfizer is highly effective at preventing serious disease from Delta. It is much less effective at preventing symptomatic disease. It has - effectively - moved Pfizer from being a complete wiper-out of the disease, to something that mostly prevents people going to hospital and dying.
Or, to put it another way, it turns Pfizer into J&J.
The good news from Israel is that infection with original variant Covid appears to be 99% effective in stopping symptomatic Delta.
Which is interesting, because in the bloodstream, Pfizer generates a much stronger response to Delta than does an original Covid infection.
Why the difference? Well, Covid is a viral infection of the upper respiratory tract. We want the immune system primed at the spot where the virus is likely to appear.
And this is what makes the nasal administration of vaccines so interesting. It has the potential to prime the immune system in the right spot, and to eliminate the need for needles. Trials in monkeys have been extremely encouraging. One hopes it will work as well (and safely) with humans.
Out of interest @rcs1000 , what is your assessment of the overall effectiveness of the vaccines as a way of spread of COVID? I suggested earlier today that I understood the vaccines were most effective at preventing hospitalisations and did not stop the disease from being transmitted; I was told in response that the data was unaminous that the vaccines prevent the spread of COVID. However, this came across as a bit of an assertion / belief that many people on here hold, rather than anything that has been seriously proven.
Vaccines reduce spread, but not as much with Delta as with original variant Covid.
With original Covid, Pfizer and Moderna stopped any detectable Covid infection in 85+% of cases. This meant that the effect on transmission was dramatic.
Things have changed somewhat with Delta.
Your infectiousness is a combination of two factors:
- the amount of viral shedding - the length of your infection
With Delta, there is evidence that vaccinated people *can* exhibit as much viral shedding as the unvaccinated. (However, I'd not this is a 'can', not a 'will', and I'd expect the actual levels to lower on average.)
Fortunately there is plenty of evidence that being vaccinated reduces the length of your infection. So, an unvaccinated person might give out 1,000 units of CV19 for 10 days, while an unvaccinated person might put out 600 units for 4 days. That's a big difference in overall infectiousness.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
People have put the case on here for the benefits of canvassing, and in a genuinely extremely tight contest I can perhaps see it having an effect, but given parties often seem no better at picking up major shifts in support than anyone else, and you can big changes in areas without significant canvassing too, I confess my default view is that many of those who have done a lot of canvassing cannot help but assume their efforts have been much more impactful than is in fact the case (or more useful for info gathering purposes than is the case), and that they are too close to the activity to accept that as a possibility.
Wrong.
Which bit? That in a tight contest canvassing might be effective, or that more generally canvassing might not be as effective as activists think it is, or that activists cannot accept the possibility that it is not that effective as they assume their own efforts must be effective?
I don't know for sure, but having had a winning candidate tell me they won an area against their own expectation with a big swing in the vote, without bothering to even attempt to canvass half the seat, whilst only a singular example does colour my own assumptions when people trumpet their efforts.
I went to a Korean restaurant when I was in America. No dog on the menu, but I ate the most disgusting food ever.
It was called Tofu. It looked like congealed snot and was tasteless. I hear there's people in the UK who eat it on a regular basis. Chacun son gout, as the French say, and for good reason.
There are people who live to eat and people who eat to live. There is a third category - people who dislike the idea of enjoying food so much that they eat tofu.
There is a Chinese restaurant in Dubai, in part of the big Jumeriah complex, and it's named after some famous explorer.
They do this incredibly light, fluffy tofu that is flash fried, so it is crispy on the outside and soft and silky on the inside. It's then tossed with spring onions and a bunch of other spices.
It is a genuinely great dish, flavoursome and complex.
I admit that almost every other time I've been served tofu, I've been disappointed.
I’m not vegan, or even veggie, but I do enjoy tofu if cooked well (which usually means with the flavour of something else imparted).
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
On the rape during war time thing, I believe it’s generally accepted that the rape of the woman of the conquered hasn’t much to do with sex. The rape of the conquered men probably isn’t that different. Ancient Evenings supports that view, even if Mailer was a bit over-interested in bum stuff.
Never really understood this claim. I'd hate to get into an argument about it, for fear of seeming over invested in it, but whenever I've had sex (probably about the median frequency for my age, sex and class) it's been about sex, mainly. It might have overtones of other things, but if it was mainly about other things it probably wouldn't happen at all, iyswim.
I really don't want to get into discussing my sex life on here (I'm sure you'll all be delighted to hear) but it's adult women I find attractive.
I really don't understand those who have a penchant for boys and animals.
The most bizarre post in PB history?
Is that "have a penchant for {boys and animals}" or "{for boys} and {for animals}"? And why do you think it makes you better, worse or more interesting than any other poster? And are you giving us some kind of a clue about how s.28 was ever a thing?
Me, I can't resist buggering a hamster. Mad for it.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
Would be interesting to know if the (admittedly rare) side effects from the jabs are still happening for 3rd jabs. If they were, I could understand the scientists' reluctance...
Out of interest, how many jabs are you prepared to take before you say feck this for a game of soldiers?
Because, possibly, your freedom will depend on it. Some of us are preparing ourselves to become second class citizens already.
If you don't get the booster, that could be you too.
On the contrary (sic) freedom is dependent on being vaccinated. Returning to normal life requires it.
Freedom based on vaccination will not be a 'return' to anything. It certainly won't be a return to normal life.
Only if you see 'death' as freedom for a substantial number of people ...
Vaccinated people can easily both get and pass on covid. Protection, as it is becoming increasingly clear, wanes after a few months.
Not easily. They possibly can but it's not easily.
Some unvaccinated people have had delta covid. The ONS shows that reinfection in these cases, and thus therefore the ability to pass covid on, is very low.
It would make far more sense, surely, to make antibody testing the yardstick, rather than vaccination? does it really matter how you acquire your protection?
Delta covid has only been around for eight months. It's only been common enough to be named as a subvariant for three or four months. Not really enough time for the smaller subset of unvaccinated people to get it twice.
I therefore treat your claim with suspicion. Do you have linkies to it, please?
And antibodies aren't the only way the body defeats Covid. The immune system is much more complex than that...
1) Studies from Israel have been having some slightly odd results recently. 2) Pfizer only. 3) A media report on one study.
So you wish me to continue?
The data from Israel is that Pfizer is highly effective at preventing serious disease from Delta. It is much less effective at preventing symptomatic disease. It has - effectively - moved Pfizer from being a complete wiper-out of the disease, to something that mostly prevents people going to hospital and dying.
Or, to put it another way, it turns Pfizer into J&J.
The good news from Israel is that infection with original variant Covid appears to be 99% effective in stopping symptomatic Delta.
Which is interesting, because in the bloodstream, Pfizer generates a much stronger response to Delta than does an original Covid infection.
Why the difference? Well, Covid is a viral infection of the upper respiratory tract. We want the immune system primed at the spot where the virus is likely to appear.
There’s that - and the factor of the least robust of the unvaccinated having died from their first encounter with Covid, so not being around to be infected again. Whereas a much large proportion of the least robust who were vaccinated survived to be infected and included in the comparison figures.
As ever, it would be useful to know how much of the serious disease burden is down to the fully vaccinated, the partially vaccinated, and the unvaccinated.
Is it still mostly refusers clogging up the wards where you are?
I am still on holiday, but when I was last in the wards were 50/50; the ICU 95% unvaxxed, about half of our ICU capacity and stopping a lot of major surgery.
Has anyone modelled how quickly delta will burn through the unvaxxed twats this summer/autumn?
Presumably, there is a pretty low finite limit to the number of unvaxxed (10%?), so the bug is running out of tinder for ICU?
Not insofar as I'm aware.
10% of the adult population is, needless to say, a LOT of people (somewhere in excess of five million.) The obvious threat is that Delta keeps finding more and more of them, and we all end up locked down for months as a result.
I'm not prepared to lockdown to protect the unvaxxed. And I certainly don't think we can close schools yet again to protect these idiots.
I know, I know, and personally if things get that bad I'd be all in favour of doing... various things to them that aren't repeatable here. But the problem is, if anti-vaxxer illnesses pose a material risk of burning down the healthcare system come the back end of the year, does the will exist to implement alternatives apart from universal restrictions to stop that from happening, and do the means?
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
The French system seems to have converted quite a few anti-vaxxers.
Although the French, in stark contrast to their self-view, are far more conformist than we are in the UK
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
All over £20?.....
I don't know about the private sector, but in the public sector you will find it significantly harder to get approval for trivial amounts of additional spending compared to spending in the millions.
Parkinson's law of triviality - see C. Northcote Parkinson, bike shed discussion.
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
This devolved thing is great isn't it?
If only we could get back to that time when Scotland didn’t have it’s own health care system.
On the rape during war time thing, I believe it’s generally accepted that the rape of the woman of the conquered hasn’t much to do with sex. The rape of the conquered men probably isn’t that different. Ancient Evenings supports that view, even if Mailer was a bit over-interested in bum stuff.
Never really understood this claim. I'd hate to get into an argument about it, for fear of seeming over invested in it, but whenever I've had sex (probably about the median frequency for my age, sex and class) it's been about sex, mainly. It might have overtones of other things, but if it was mainly about other things it probably wouldn't happen at all, iyswim.
I really don't want to get into discussing my sex life on here (I'm sure you'll all be delighted to hear) but it's adult women I find attractive.
I really don't understand those who have a penchant for boys and animals.
The most bizarre post in PB history?
Is that "have a penchant for {boys and animals}" or "{for boys} and {for animals}"? And why do you think it makes you better, worse or more interesting than any other poster? And are you giving us some kind of a clue about how s.28 was ever a thing?
Me, I can't resist buggering a hamster. Mad for it.
I was responding to your post on motivations for sex, and developing the discussion in a way that followed on from up thread.
I can only conclude from your erratic and inconsistent nature that you suffer from some sort of schizophrenic personality disorder.
As ever, it would be useful to know how much of the serious disease burden is down to the fully vaccinated, the partially vaccinated, and the unvaccinated.
Is it still mostly refusers clogging up the wards where you are?
I am still on holiday, but when I was last in the wards were 50/50; the ICU 95% unvaxxed, about half of our ICU capacity and stopping a lot of major surgery.
Has anyone modelled how quickly delta will burn through the unvaxxed twats this summer/autumn?
Presumably, there is a pretty low finite limit to the number of unvaxxed (10%?), so the bug is running out of tinder for ICU?
Not insofar as I'm aware.
10% of the adult population is, needless to say, a LOT of people (somewhere in excess of five million.) The obvious threat is that Delta keeps finding more and more of them, and we all end up locked down for months as a result.
I'm not prepared to lockdown to protect the unvaxxed. And I certainly don't think we can close schools yet again to protect these idiots.
I know, I know, and personally if things get that bad I'd be all in favour of doing... various things to them that aren't repeatable here. But the problem is, if anti-vaxxer illnesses pose a material risk of burning down the healthcare system come the back end of the year, does the will exist to implement alternatives apart from universal restrictions to stop that from happening, and do the means?
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
The French system seems to have converted quite a few anti-vaxxers.
The UK's various governments, central and devolved, seem supremely reluctant to embark down this path though. Whitehall is apparently still contemplating vaxports for entry to nightclubs and mass crowd events, but that's a relatively minor inconvenience which is liable to annoy the vaccinated and do nothing to twist the arms of the stubborn.
I can see where this all leads. Ministers watching the hospital numbers climbing inexorably over the Autumn, making a series of barely effectual yet increasingly intrusive gestures - vaxports to go to the pub, vaxports to go to the hairdresser, vaxports to get on trains - whilst leaving the refusers free to catch Covid in supermarkets and GP surgeries. Followed by yet another slow collapse back into lockdown as they just dig their heels in harder and harder.
Oh well, there's nothing you and I can do about it, except cross our fingers and hope that not enough of them get sick at any one time to cause such a disaster. With 90% acceptance, I'd say we were giving ourselves as good a chance as any country - although if the JCVI boffins would stop dicking about and finally let the 12-15 year olds get lanced like in much of the rest of the developed world, then that could only improve matters further.
Would be interesting to know if the (admittedly rare) side effects from the jabs are still happening for 3rd jabs. If they were, I could understand the scientists' reluctance...
Out of interest, how many jabs are you prepared to take before you say feck this for a game of soldiers?
Because, possibly, your freedom will depend on it. Some of us are preparing ourselves to become second class citizens already.
If you don't get the booster, that could be you too.
On the contrary (sic) freedom is dependent on being vaccinated. Returning to normal life requires it.
Freedom based on vaccination will not be a 'return' to anything. It certainly won't be a return to normal life.
Only if you see 'death' as freedom for a substantial number of people ...
Vaccinated people can easily both get and pass on covid. Protection, as it is becoming increasingly clear, wanes after a few months.
Not easily. They possibly can but it's not easily.
Some unvaccinated people have had delta covid. The ONS shows that reinfection in these cases, and thus therefore the ability to pass covid on, is very low.
It would make far more sense, surely, to make antibody testing the yardstick, rather than vaccination? does it really matter how you acquire your protection?
Delta covid has only been around for eight months. It's only been common enough to be named as a subvariant for three or four months. Not really enough time for the smaller subset of unvaccinated people to get it twice.
I therefore treat your claim with suspicion. Do you have linkies to it, please?
And antibodies aren't the only way the body defeats Covid. The immune system is much more complex than that...
1) Studies from Israel have been having some slightly odd results recently. 2) Pfizer only. 3) A media report on one study.
So you wish me to continue?
The data from Israel is that Pfizer is highly effective at preventing serious disease from Delta. It is much less effective at preventing symptomatic disease. It has - effectively - moved Pfizer from being a complete wiper-out of the disease, to something that mostly prevents people going to hospital and dying.
Or, to put it another way, it turns Pfizer into J&J.
The good news from Israel is that infection with original variant Covid appears to be 99% effective in stopping symptomatic Delta.
Which is interesting, because in the bloodstream, Pfizer generates a much stronger response to Delta than does an original Covid infection.
Why the difference? Well, Covid is a viral infection of the upper respiratory tract. We want the immune system primed at the spot where the virus is likely to appear.
And this is what makes the nasal administration of vaccines so interesting. It has the potential to prime the immune system in the right spot, and to eliminate the need for needles. Trials in monkeys have been extremely encouraging. One hopes it will work as well (and safely) with humans.
Out of interest @rcs1000 , what is your assessment of the overall effectiveness of the vaccines as a way of spread of COVID? I suggested earlier today that I understood the vaccines were most effective at preventing hospitalisations and did not stop the disease from being transmitted; I was told in response that the data was unaminous that the vaccines prevent the spread of COVID. However, this came across as a bit of an assertion / belief that many people on here hold, rather than anything that has been seriously proven.
Vaccines reduce spread, but not as much with Delta as with original variant Covid.
With original Covid, Pfizer and Moderna stopped any detectable Covid infection in 85+% of cases. This meant that the effect on transmission was dramatic.
Things have changed somewhat with Delta.
Your infectiousness is a combination of two factors:
- the amount of viral shedding - the length of your infection
With Delta, there is evidence that vaccinated people *can* exhibit as much viral shedding as the unvaccinated. (However, I'd not this is a 'can', not a 'will', and I'd expect the actual levels to lower on average.)
Fortunately there is plenty of evidence that being vaccinated reduces the length of your infection. So, an unvaccinated person might give out 1,000 units of CV19 for 10 days, while an unvaccinated person might put out 600 units for 4 days. That's a big difference in overall infectiousness.
Thanks for this, much appreciated. I would definetly be interested in any comments from @Malmesbury on this point, given the exchanges earlier.
I think it was @Sean_Fear who once said on here that canvassing gives a fairly reasonable picture or your own likely support but none whatever about your opponents. I completely agree with him based on almost 40 years on the doorsteps. And you definitely get a full sense of all the local issues and concerns, which is very useful if you succeed in getting elected.
But of course a large proportion of the 35% who do bother to vote locally do so on national politics anyway. When I stood in 2019 (very reluctantly as the branch concerned simply couldn't find a candidate), I knew I wouldn't win after the first morning of canvassing. It was just days after Mrs May reneged on the pledge not to extend Article 50. The weeks of campaigning were just painful, though like Nick P, I never encountered abuse or unpleasantness.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The South Asians also boil rice - rice is pretty ubiquitous over there!
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
It's a known problem.
The good news is that:
Last month the Scottish government confirmed that a digital scheme would replace the paper vaccination certificates. It awarded a £600,000 contract to a Danish firm to develop the digital system, which is expected to launch in September."
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Get a Dell Ultrasharp - After trying one out, mainly for accurate photo editing, I got two for my office workstation and two for WFH.
Two monitor working is far more efficient, and turning your head only the small amount from one to the other also helped.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
Personally (and this comes back to my preferring process to outcomes), abortion should not have been legalized through the back door of Roe vs Wade. It should have been legalized by voters in ballot boxes.
But I think that the Supreme Court would be utterly bonkers not to strike this down. Because if this mechanism is legal, it pretty much gives state legislatures the power to completely overrule the Federal Government, the Supreme Court and even the constitution itself.
I mean this is the end goal for the 40 year old Federalist Society project. A network of judges from top to bottom that can override the law and constitution to impose conservative value regardless of what the voters vote for.
We had the Supreme Court allowing District judges to write US foreign policy a couple of weeks ago with the pants on head endorsement of the immigration decision.
This gutting of Roe vs Wade is the absolute perfect approach for them. They get to make abortion functionally illegal without having to write the absolute flash point, rallying, cry court packing sentence "Roe vs Wade is overturned"
INDEPENDENT DIGITAL: Experts set to delay Covid jabs for teenagers #TomorrowsPapersToday https://t.co/EHiqOlekgC
The new excuse, it will get in the way with doing the vulernable...bullshit...they should have done them over the holidays, but failing that its easy, all the kids are in one place, they are the easiest to get to...in the school hall, line up, straight through a whole school in a day.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Get a Dell Ultrasharp - After trying one out, mainly for accurate photo editing, I got two for my office workstation and two for WFH.
Two monitor working is far more efficient, and turning your head only the small amount from one to the other also helped.
Curved ultrawide much better than two monitors. Not even close.
Or you can go really crazy and stack two ultrawides.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Birth control campaign in the 90s, says the internet
Iran has a surprisingly high rate of female tertiary education, particularly since 1979. It is not the Taliban that rule there:
"In 1975 just four years before the Revolution, fewer than 30% of Iranian women were literate. In 2015 that number was over 80%, nearly on par with male literacy. In 1977 the country had 16 universities with 154 000 undergraduate students. Today, Iran has 51 state universities and potentially as many as 354 private higher education institutions, increasing the number of students enrolled from 1.3 million in 1999 to 4.7 million in 2014. Over the past decade, women in higher education institutions have constituted at least 50% of the population, and 60% of those who passed the national examination for university entrance were women."
Iran has quite a problem of graduate unemployment, particularly for females. It does seem that it is female education, not employment that reduces fertility.
It’s why it is such a good use of development fundi g
Who knew Glasgow and Lanarkshire were so popular with English tourists?
Glasgow and Lanarkshire are the two worse hit coronavirus hotspots in Europe, according to the World Health Organisation.
The rate of Covid-19 cases per person in the two Scottish regions are significantly higher than elsewhere in the country, the United Kingdom and the continent.
Lanarkshire’s seven-day rate of cases per 100,000 people was more than 1111, with Glasgow’s higher than 1014.
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
It's a known problem.
The good news is that:
Last month the Scottish government confirmed that a digital scheme would replace the paper vaccination certificates. It awarded a £600,000 contract to a Danish firm to develop the digital system, which is expected to launch in September."
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
It's a known problem.
The good news is that:
Last month the Scottish government confirmed that a digital scheme would replace the paper vaccination certificates. It awarded a £600,000 contract to a Danish firm to develop the digital system, which is expected to launch in September."
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
This devolved thing is great isn't it?
If only we could get back to that time when Scotland didn’t have it’s own health care system.
If only we could back to that time when public services in Scotland were ran in a half way to competent manner.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
People have put the case on here for the benefits of canvassing, and in a genuinely extremely tight contest I can perhaps see it having an effect, but given parties often seem no better at picking up major shifts in support than anyone else, and you can big changes in areas without significant canvassing too, I confess my default view is that many of those who have done a lot of canvassing cannot help but assume their efforts have been much more impactful than is in fact the case (or more useful for info gathering purposes than is the case), and that they are too close to the activity to accept that as a possibility.
Wrong.
Which bit? That in a tight contest canvassing might be effective, or that more generally canvassing might not be as effective as activists think it is, or that activists cannot accept the possibility that it is not that effective as they assume their own efforts must be effective?
I don't know for sure, but having had a winning candidate tell me they won an area against their own expectation with a big swing in the vote, without bothering to even attempt to canvass half the seat, whilst only a singular example does colour my own assumptions when people trumpet their efforts.
Depends a lot on the turnout, I think.
For a lot of local elections, it's really pretty shoddy. The recent London mayoral election was about 50%, which is bad enough, but some places I know have turnouts of 20% or so.
Once the turnout is that low, you don't need many votes to win, and most parties have got enough supporters that, if only they could persuade all their General Election voters to go out and vote in a local election, they'd win. If you can do that once, success breeds success- it's the sort of thing that Liberals and their successors have done very efficiently for four or five decades now.
If the winning post is low enough, any party can win anywhere by sheer force of effort. And having won, keeping the canvassing and all-year leafleting going is a pretty effective (if expensive in time) way of scaring off potential rivals. I reckon that what eventually did for the Conservatives in Cambridge was the realisation of Labour and the Lib Dems that fighting each other was hard work, and the remaining Conservative wards offered much easier pickings.
But whilst shoe leather gets you so far, beyond a certain point the national picture takes over. (Though that's more to do with your supporters staying at home than voters swinging to the other side.)
Who knew Glasgow and Lanarkshire were so popular with English tourists?
Glasgow and Lanarkshire are the two worse hit coronavirus hotspots in Europe, according to the World Health Organisation.
The rate of Covid-19 cases per person in the two Scottish regions are significantly higher than elsewhere in the country, the United Kingdom and the continent.
Lanarkshire’s seven-day rate of cases per 100,000 people was more than 1111, with Glasgow’s higher than 1014.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
With regard to canvassing, I have done a bit of this. My impression was that it was completely inefficient, the people I spoke to at the doorstep were all probably lying to me, and it was largely a form of therapy for political activists.
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
People have put the case on here for the benefits of canvassing, and in a genuinely extremely tight contest I can perhaps see it having an effect, but given parties often seem no better at picking up major shifts in support than anyone else, and you can big changes in areas without significant canvassing too, I confess my default view is that many of those who have done a lot of canvassing cannot help but assume their efforts have been much more impactful than is in fact the case (or more useful for info gathering purposes than is the case), and that they are too close to the activity to accept that as a possibility.
Wrong.
Which bit? That in a tight contest canvassing might be effective, or that more generally canvassing might not be as effective as activists think it is, or that activists cannot accept the possibility that it is not that effective as they assume their own efforts must be effective?
I don't know for sure, but having had a winning candidate tell me they won an area against their own expectation with a big swing in the vote, without bothering to even attempt to canvass half the seat, whilst only a singular example does colour my own assumptions when people trumpet their efforts.
I agree that canvassing is, on the whole, a waste of time. Especially in General Elections. But it gives activists a sense of purpose and makes those of us who can't be bothered to take part feel a little bit guilty.
In the 1997 landslide we got swings every bit as dramatic in seats we ignored as in target seats with doors being knocked, phones being called and leaflets stuffed through letterboxes 24/7.
And American prisons, I understand, apparently semi-tolerated. Lots of American novels have the good-guy hero menacing some villain with "you'd better practice not bending over in the shower if you don't tell us who your boss is". Or is that just crime writer hype?
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Baking rice is the best in my experience.
(Especially when you cover the final product in mint, pomegranate molasses/seeds, chopped olives, walnuts and feta a la Ottolenghi)
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans them after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
Fascinating documentary just finished on BBC1 on the Bush administration's response to 9/11 with interviews with all the key players
It was. Interesting how the big players in controversial US events are willing to go on the record, I noticed the same on a recent Watergate documentary. W saying revenge was in the air at his ground zero visit was striking, not sure that worked out well for anyone.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans them after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
So, if they were all in favour of slavery....
Protecting the lives of the unborn is not protecting slavery, in fact it is the opposite, respecting the dignity of human life.
One for the PB brains trust. My son has just had his second jab and has applied for the letter from NHS Scotland confirming his status but a friend of mine whose daughter is at UCL says this won't do because of the lack of a QR code. Is there some way of getting an English certificate with a QR code if you produce the letter from NHS Scotland? If so, who do we apply to?
This devolved thing is great isn't it?
If only we could get back to that time when Scotland didn’t have it’s own health care system.
If only we could back to that time when public services in Scotland were ran in a half way to competent manner.
And the chaps who were saying open everything up at Christmas in charge?
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Eh? There are two ways, both valid but with different characteristics. The absorption method requires exactly the right amount of water, and works well if you get it right. It's the method usually used in China and surrounding areas. However, it produces a rather heavy result because the starch is retained. In Iran where they know a thing or two about rice, this is the kateh method.
Alternatively, you can get superb results with the chelo method, where you use a lot of water and drain it off before steaming in the pan over a very low heat, covering the pan with a clean tea towel to absorb excess steam This gives a lighter result because the starch is washed away. It works particularly well with Basmati-style rices.
The big error most Brits make when cooking rice is to fall between these two stools; too much water for kateh, not enough for chelo, so they end up with a sticky mess.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans them after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
So, if they were all in favour of slavery....
Protecting the lives of the unborn is not protecting slavery, in fact it is the opposite, respecting the dignity of human life.
Both are protecting the autonomy of the human body, specifically women in the abortion case. I find the idea of abortion morally abhorrent but I do not claim the right to make that choice for others.
Fascinating documentary just finished on BBC1 on the Bush administration's response to 9/11 with interviews with all the key players
It was. Interesting how the big players in controversial US events are willing to go on the record, I noticed the same on a recent Watergate documentary. W saying revenge was in the air at his ground zero visit was striking, not sure that worked out well for anyone.
Well it did at least prevent another attack on US soil for 20 years, we wait and see whether that lasts now Biden has fully withdrawn
I went to a Korean restaurant when I was in America. No dog on the menu, but I ate the most disgusting food ever.
It was called Tofu. It looked like congealed snot and was tasteless. I hear there's people in the UK who eat it on a regular basis. Chacun son gout, as the French say, and for good reason.
I'm that person. Stir-fried beancurd with minced pork, spring onion, root ginger, soy sauce and chilli if you like it hot. Delicious!
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
I support the repeal of Roe vs Wade, because it is the job of legislatures, not judges, to create laws.
However, the Texas law is properly bonkers, because it puts the power of enforcement entirely in the hands of private citizens via the law courts, and then protects them against ever bearing the costs of their actions.
The US constitution guarantees the rights of citizens to bear arms. Should California be allowed to pass a law making it de facto illegal? One would think "no". But that is the logical consequence of this Texas law being allowed to stand.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans them after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
So, if they were all in favour of slavery....
Protecting the lives of the unborn is not protecting slavery, in fact it is the opposite, respecting the dignity of human life.
Both are protecting the autonomy of the human body, specifically women in the abortion case. I find the idea of abortion morally abhorrent but I do not claim the right to make that choice for others.
Pregnant women also carry another life, slaves do not.
I do however accept abortion in the case of protecting the life of the mother.
I would also not myself ban abortion but would reduce the time limit.
However if Texas wants to go further that is its right, it is a very conservative state, pro choice campaigners will just have to accept they cannot always get their own way
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Get a Dell Ultrasharp - After trying one out, mainly for accurate photo editing, I got two for my office workstation and two for WFH.
Two monitor working is far more efficient, and turning your head only the small amount from one to the other also helped.
I can't cope with two monitors. I spend half the day trying to find the mouse cursor.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
When most women aren't even aware they are pregnant, so in effect it is a ban on abortion.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
I support the repeal of Roe vs Wade, because it is the job of legislatures, not judges, to create laws.
However, the Texas law is properly bonkers, because it puts the power of enforcement entirely in the hands of private citizens via the law courts, and then protects them against ever bearing the costs of their actions.
The US constitution guarantees the rights of citizens to bear arms. Should California be allowed to pass a law making it de facto illegal? One would think "no". But that is the logical consequence of this Texas law being allowed to stand.
There is a defined US constitutional right to bear arms under the 2nd amendment, to change that would require the agreement of every US state, the President and Congress. Though that right could come with tighter background checks etc.
There is no defined US constitutional right to an abortion, the judgement in Roe v Wade merely interpreted the due process clause under the 14th amendment of the constitution to provide one
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The South Asians also boil rice - rice is pretty ubiquitous over there!
Ubiquitous? Much more common to be served roti rather than rice in a Punjabi home.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Eh? There are two ways, both valid but with different characteristics. The absorption method requires exactly the right amount of water, and works well if you get it right. It's the method usually used in China and surrounding areas. However, it produces a rather heavy result because the starch is retained. In Iran where they know a thing or two about rice, this is the kateh method.
Alternatively, you can get superb results with the chelo method, where you use a lot of water and drain it off before steaming in the pan over a very low heat, covering the pan with a clean tea towel to absorb excess steam This gives a lighter result because the starch is washed away. It works particularly well with Basmati-style rices.
The big error most Brits make when cooking rice is to fall between these two stools; too much water for kateh, not enough for chelo, so they end up with a sticky mess.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The South Asians also boil rice - rice is pretty ubiquitous over there!
Ubiquitous? Much more common to be served roti rather than rice in a Punjabi home.
Currently in a fight with my firm’s IT department over whether I should be allowed a VESA mount for home, which apparently is not firm policy. What century is this anyway? My current monitor is piss poor resolution and has zero height adjustment and its killing my neck and my eyes ffs. 🤦♂️
Get a Dell Ultrasharp - After trying one out, mainly for accurate photo editing, I got two for my office workstation and two for WFH.
Two monitor working is far more efficient, and turning your head only the small amount from one to the other also helped.
I can't cope with two monitors. I spend half the day trying to find the mouse cursor.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Eh? There are two ways, both valid but with different characteristics. The absorption method requires exactly the right amount of water, and works well if you get it right. It's the method usually used in China and surrounding areas. However, it produces a rather heavy result because the starch is retained. In Iran where they know a thing or two about rice, this is the kateh method.
Alternatively, you can get superb results with the chelo method, where you use a lot of water and drain it off before steaming in the pan over a very low heat, covering the pan with a clean tea towel to absorb excess steam This gives a lighter result because the starch is washed away. It works particularly well with Basmati-style rices.
The big error most Brits make when cooking rice is to fall between these two stools; too much water for kateh, not enough for chelo, so they end up with a sticky mess.
I wash the rice (three times) before boiling it (two cups of water per cup of rice).
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The absorption method (i.e. precise rice to water ratio) is the only correct way to cook rice without a rice cooker.
Eh? There are two ways, both valid but with different characteristics. The absorption method requires exactly the right amount of water, and works well if you get it right. It's the method usually used in China and surrounding areas. However, it produces a rather heavy result because the starch is retained. In Iran where they know a thing or two about rice, this is the kateh method.
Alternatively, you can get superb results with the chelo method, where you use a lot of water and drain it off before steaming in the pan over a very low heat, covering the pan with a clean tea towel to absorb excess steam This gives a lighter result because the starch is washed away. It works particularly well with Basmati-style rices.
The big error most Brits make when cooking rice is to fall between these two stools; too much water for kateh, not enough for chelo, so they end up with a sticky mess.
You need the starch, and use the steam method, if you are going to eat rice with chopsticks. Also steaming rice has one of those wonderful smells, like mown hay, baked bread and so on. It's the best way of cooking if you eat the rice plain.
I am always surprised with the rise of every kitchen gadget under the sun, how uncommon rice cookers are in most people's homes. Every person from the Far East I know just think we are crazy that we boil rice, its just the road to ruin (or worse microwave it).
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
The South Asians also boil rice - rice is pretty ubiquitous over there!
Ubiquitous? Much more common to be served roti rather than rice in a Punjabi home.
Punjab is just one region of the Subcontinent.
Don't go all HYUFD on me!
Ubiquitous: present, appearing, or found everywhere.
So Roe vs Wade gets repealed tomorrow with the Texas Abortion Bounty system going into effect. You would think that would be bigger news.
Has the Supreme Court chosen not to hear the case?
Well, they've technically got 9 hours left to respond.
But that's only on the shadow docket to lay an injunction down. If they don't whilst the case could still get to the supreme court as soon as the law goes live in Texas tomorrow then that's pretty much it for safe legal abortion in the state even if the SC does eventually repeal the law.
This is truly the most cowardly way the conservatives on the SC could have faced the issue.
Personally I have no problem with it. Republicans control the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate and the Governor of Texas is a Republican, Greg Abbott and all are pro life. Voters knew what they were choosing when they voted for them.
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
I support the repeal of Roe vs Wade, because it is the job of legislatures, not judges, to create laws.
However, the Texas law is properly bonkers, because it puts the power of enforcement entirely in the hands of private citizens via the law courts, and then protects them against ever bearing the costs of their actions.
The US constitution guarantees the rights of citizens to bear arms. Should California be allowed to pass a law making it de facto illegal? One would think "no". But that is the logical consequence of this Texas law being allowed to stand.
There is a defined US constitutional right to bear arms under the 2nd amendment, to change that would require the agreement of every US state, the President and Congress. Though that right could come with tighter background checks etc.
There is no defined US constitutional right to an abortion, the judgement in Roe v Wade merely interpreted the due process clause under the 14th amendment of the constitution to provide one
My issue is NOT with Texas passing laws that respect their voters' wishes.
It is that the method Texas is using is such that - if not struck down - could be employed by any a state to prevent the sale of arms. Or to ban gay or interracial marriage. It's a legal loophole that the Supreme Court would be wise to address now.
Basically, the way the law works is that the State of Texas will not enforce the abortion ban themselves. Instead, private individuals are allowed to sue those who perform abortions. If the abortion clinic wins, they get nothing, not even their costs. If the individual wins, then they get all their costs back from the clinic.
The idea is that - because it is not the State enforcing the law - then it cannot be sued for the unconstutitionality of the law. But (as about 100 legal scholars, including some very conservative ones) have noted, it essentially allows States to criminalise things that are specifically permitted by the constitution.
Comments
I accepted however that it does have some underlying function: in that you can use it to find out who is going to vote for you, and then you can make sure that they actually vote on election day.
I mean, even if gasping for air, or facing severe illness or injury, there’s surely a principle involved. Going in to hospital sacrifices your freedom and puts you into the power of medical professionals who may not be up to speed with the latest youtube videos or lockdown sceptics articles.
Unless their principles turn out to be non-absolute, anyway, in which case why not bloody get the vaccinations in the first place?
Anyway, have fun RP, if you do get the call!
You should really get yourself a decent monitor, once you do, you will never know you managed without it. Not just meaning your eyes aren't screwed, but a 34 or 38" ultrawides are just awesome when you need loads of different documents / coding screens open at the same time.
I'm going to steal that.
If you need to stop the anti-vaxxers sending things to Hell in a handcart without punishment beating everyone, then you need to target them specifically and, presumably, lock them down very hard to keep them segregated from the general population (as in virtual house arrest - including no outdoor exercise or food shopping trips.) How do you police that number of people effectively and separately from the bulk of the population, and is there the stomach for keeping them all fed, watered and heated using home deliveries, plus subsistence benefits for all those who can't work from home and have been kicked out of their jobs? Alternatively, do you allow them to go free but deny them medical treatment, at least to the same degree as the rest of the population, to preserve the capacity for everyone else?
You can see how this has the capacity to get very nasty, very quickly if the epidemic amongst the unvaccinated fails to burn itself out.
The problem is probably with me - I'm obviously not cut out for politics.
But I think that the Supreme Court would be utterly bonkers not to strike this down. Because if this mechanism is legal, it pretty much gives state legislatures the power to completely overrule the Federal Government, the Supreme Court and even the constitution itself.
By contrast consider Jainism: I copied this clip from the web:
"Jains believe that animals and plants, as well as human beings, contain living souls. Each of these souls is considered of equal value and should be treated with respect and compassion. Jains are strict vegetarians and live in a way that minimises their use of the world's resources."
Meaningful labelling would help (and I know Defra is working on that too). There was a brand of milk called "Pure" that I came across. Was it unusually pure? Organic? Free range? As far as I could work out, nah. It's just a brand name. And I remember going round an egg farm and asking the farmer what "fresh" actually meant. He chortled:- "It doesn't mean anything, mate, it's just marketing."
See also, for example:
https://www.theguardian.com/working-in-development/2017/nov/21/male-sexual-torture-in-the-syrian-war-it-is-everywhere
and:
https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2019/09/04/Rohingya-men-raped-Myanmar-Bangladesh-refugee-camps-GBV
With original Covid, Pfizer and Moderna stopped any detectable Covid infection in 85+% of cases. This meant that the effect on transmission was dramatic.
Things have changed somewhat with Delta.
Your infectiousness is a combination of two factors:
- the amount of viral shedding
- the length of your infection
With Delta, there is evidence that vaccinated people *can* exhibit as much viral shedding as the unvaccinated. (However, I'd not this is a 'can', not a 'will', and I'd expect the actual levels to lower on average.)
Fortunately there is plenty of evidence that being vaccinated reduces the length of your infection. So, an unvaccinated person might give out 1,000 units of CV19 for 10 days, while an unvaccinated person might put out 600 units for 4 days. That's a big difference in overall infectiousness.
I don't know for sure, but having had a winning candidate tell me they won an area against their own expectation with a big swing in the vote, without bothering to even attempt to canvass half the seat, whilst only a singular example does colour my own assumptions when people trumpet their efforts.
With tofu, isnt part of the secret you need a tofu press?
I can only conclude from your erratic and inconsistent nature that you suffer from some sort of schizophrenic personality disorder.
I can see where this all leads. Ministers watching the hospital numbers climbing inexorably over the Autumn, making a series of barely effectual yet increasingly intrusive gestures - vaxports to go to the pub, vaxports to go to the hairdresser, vaxports to get on trains - whilst leaving the refusers free to catch Covid in supermarkets and GP surgeries. Followed by yet another slow collapse back into lockdown as they just dig their heels in harder and harder.
Oh well, there's nothing you and I can do about it, except cross our fingers and hope that not enough of them get sick at any one time to cause such a disaster. With 90% acceptance, I'd say we were giving ourselves as good a chance as any country - although if the JCVI boffins would stop dicking about and finally let the 12-15 year olds get lanced like in much of the rest of the developed world, then that could only improve matters further.
But of course a large proportion of the 35% who do bother to vote locally do so on national politics anyway. When I stood in 2019 (very reluctantly as the branch concerned simply couldn't find a candidate), I knew I wouldn't win after the first morning of canvassing. It was just days after Mrs May reneged on the pledge not to extend Article 50. The weeks of campaigning were just painful, though like Nick P, I never encountered abuse or unpleasantness.
The good news is that:
Last month the Scottish government confirmed that a digital scheme would replace the paper vaccination certificates. It awarded a £600,000 contract to a Danish firm to develop the digital system, which is expected to launch in September."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57862733
Because who wouldn't want to spend £600,000 so they don't have to use the same one as NHS England ?
Two monitor working is far more efficient, and turning your head only the small amount from one to the other also helped.
We had the Supreme Court allowing District judges to write US foreign policy a couple of weeks ago with the pants on head endorsement of the immigration decision.
This gutting of Roe vs Wade is the absolute perfect approach for them. They get to make abortion functionally illegal without having to write the absolute flash point, rallying, cry court packing sentence "Roe vs Wade is overturned"
INDEPENDENT DIGITAL: Experts set to delay Covid jabs for teenagers #TomorrowsPapersToday https://t.co/EHiqOlekgC
The new excuse, it will get in the way with doing the vulernable...bullshit...they should have done them over the holidays, but failing that its easy, all the kids are in one place, they are the easiest to get to...in the school hall, line up, straight through a whole school in a day.
Or you can go really crazy and stack two ultrawides.
Glasgow and Lanarkshire are the two worse hit coronavirus hotspots in Europe, according to the World Health Organisation.
The rate of Covid-19 cases per person in the two Scottish regions are significantly higher than elsewhere in the country, the United Kingdom and the continent.
Lanarkshire’s seven-day rate of cases per 100,000 people was more than 1111, with Glasgow’s higher than 1014.
https://news.stv.tv/west-central/glasgow-and-lanarkshire-worst-covid-hotspots-in-all-of-europe?top
For a lot of local elections, it's really pretty shoddy. The recent London mayoral election was about 50%, which is bad enough, but some places I know have turnouts of 20% or so.
Once the turnout is that low, you don't need many votes to win, and most parties have got enough supporters that, if only they could persuade all their General Election voters to go out and vote in a local election, they'd win. If you can do that once, success breeds success- it's the sort of thing that Liberals and their successors have done very efficiently for four or five decades now.
If the winning post is low enough, any party can win anywhere by sheer force of effort. And having won, keeping the canvassing and all-year leafleting going is a pretty effective (if expensive in time) way of scaring off potential rivals. I reckon that what eventually did for the Conservatives in Cambridge was the realisation of Labour and the Lib Dems that fighting each other was hard work, and the remaining Conservative wards offered much easier pickings.
But whilst shoe leather gets you so far, beyond a certain point the national picture takes over. (Though that's more to do with your supporters staying at home than voters swinging to the other side.)
It also does not ban abortion completely anyway, it just bans it after the first six weeks of Pregnancy.
In the 1997 landslide we got swings every bit as dramatic in seats we ignored as in target seats with doors being knocked, phones being called and leaflets stuffed through letterboxes 24/7.
(Especially when you cover the final product in mint, pomegranate molasses/seeds, chopped olives, walnuts and feta a la Ottolenghi)
125cc Honda motorbikes hardly depreciate at all. An average mileage Honda Forza 125 bought in 2015 cost £4000 new, and will today sell for £3500.
Interesting how the big players in controversial US events are willing to go on the record, I noticed the same on a recent Watergate documentary. W saying revenge was in the air at his ground zero visit was striking, not sure that worked out well for anyone.
Alternatively, you can get superb results with the chelo method, where you use a lot of water and drain it off before steaming in the pan over a very low heat, covering the pan with a clean tea towel to absorb excess steam This gives a lighter result because the starch is washed away. It works particularly well with Basmati-style rices.
The big error most Brits make when cooking rice is to fall between these two stools; too much water for kateh, not enough for chelo, so they end up with a sticky mess.
However, the Texas law is properly bonkers, because it puts the power of enforcement entirely in the hands of private citizens via the law courts, and then protects them against ever bearing the costs of their actions.
The US constitution guarantees the rights of citizens to bear arms. Should California be allowed to pass a law making it de facto illegal? One would think "no". But that is the logical consequence of this Texas law being allowed to stand.
I do however accept abortion in the case of protecting the life of the mother.
I would also not myself ban abortion but would reduce the time limit.
However if Texas wants to go further that is its right, it is a very conservative state, pro choice campaigners will just have to accept they cannot always get their own way
Flogging a dead alpaca, so to speak.
There are roadsigns in my village warning of temporary closures,
There is no defined US constitutional right to an abortion, the judgement in Roe v Wade merely interpreted the due process clause under the 14th amendment of the constitution to provide one
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2F1MDzyW55pg97Tdpp7gqLN/should-i-be-concerned-about-arsenic-in-my-rice
Germany, Ipsos poll:
SPD-S&D: 25% (+7)
CDU/CSU-EPP: 21% (-6)
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 19% (-1)
AfD-ID: 11%
FDP-RE: 11% (+1)
LINKE-LEFT: 7%
+/- vs. 21-31 Jul
Fieldwork: 28-29 August 2021
Sample size: 2,001
➤ http://europeelects.eu/germany
Ubiquitous: present, appearing, or found everywhere.
It is that the method Texas is using is such that - if not struck down - could be employed by any a state to prevent the sale of arms. Or to ban gay or interracial marriage. It's a legal loophole that the Supreme Court would be wise to address now.
Basically, the way the law works is that the State of Texas will not enforce the abortion ban themselves. Instead, private individuals are allowed to sue those who perform abortions. If the abortion clinic wins, they get nothing, not even their costs. If the individual wins, then they get all their costs back from the clinic.
The idea is that - because it is not the State enforcing the law - then it cannot be sued for the unconstutitionality of the law. But (as about 100 legal scholars, including some very conservative ones) have noted, it essentially allows States to criminalise things that are specifically permitted by the constitution.