politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting moves even more to Cummings still being in his job

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I see Labour on manoeuvres in this cross party 'Get Boris' powow. Sadly I am not tactically minded enough to guess what they're up to, but it feels like that clever Mr. Starmer is up to something, and the nationalists should be wary - they aren't dealing with Corbyn anymore.

The sensible thing for them to do is something Parliamentary at the first Opposition Day debate - make the Tory MPs walk through the lobbies to oppose a motion censuring the PM for the conduct of his advisor. To be immediately followed by a letter-writing campaign to all the Tory MPs from "their constituents" about how upset/annoyed/furious they are that their MP doesn't hate Cummings as much as they do.

I imagine that getting everyone active for an opposition party in a Tory seat to write an individual letter, with their own sad story, at the same time, might have something of an affect on the MP's mailbox.

I don't know why I'm giving them advice though.

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1265022353987309573

That's one massive Tory-reading paper they've got back onside, as least on the front page.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Iraq, if only it hadn't been for Iraq, PB would be worshipping me to this day. Bloody Sadam

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1265022353987309573

That's one massive Tory-reading paper they've got back onside, as least on the front page.

For all the damage that the Cummings episode has done to the government, there's a silver lining for them. The less sympathetic media took their eye off the ball. Over the weekend the UK drew ahead of Italy in per capita deaths on the official daily stats, and no-one noticed.

IshmaelZ said:

SouthamObserver said:

state_go_away said:

Pulpstar said:

The most worrying point about this saga is the fact that almost noone seems to understand the difference between quarantine and lockdown.

Can't we have an English word - One is French and the other probably American ! Maybe a suggestion would be a Refrain!

Quarantine is derived Venetian, not French. It refers to the 40 days crew had to wait on ships before they could disembark when they arrived in Venice.

At Ragusa (modern Dubrovnik), not Venice, I believe.

rottenborough said:

Mexicanpete said:

eadric said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1265022083119054848

Milder than yesterday. They won't be panicking. By Wednesday this will likely be over

If you say so.

People have longer memories than other people think.

eadric said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Sandpit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I see Labour on manoeuvres in this cross party 'Get Boris' powow. Sadly I am not tactically minded enough to guess what they're up to, but it feels like that clever Mr. Starmer is up to something, and the nationalists should be wary - they aren't dealing with Corbyn anymore.

The sensible thing for them to do is something Parliamentary at the first Opposition Day debate - make the Tory MPs walk through the lobbies to oppose a motion censuring the PM for the conduct of his advisor. To be immediately followed by a letter-writing campaign to all the Tory MPs from "their constituents" about how upset/annoyed/furious they are that their MP doesn't hate Cummings as much as they do.

I imagine that getting everyone active for an opposition party in a Tory seat to write an individual letter, with their own sad story, at the same time, might have something of an affect on the MP's mailbox.

I don't know why I'm giving them advice though.

I think it's also got to do with Labour lovebombing the SNP. Remember their route to power is through Scotland.

That's mad. The SNP is Labour's sworn and mortal enemy. They might both be social democratic parties but as long as the SNP thrives in Scotland, a path to a GE victory is very very hard for Labour. And the SNP will not compromise on indy to help a Labour government, it goes against their DNA.

Moreover, the biggest threat to the SNP is a Labour revival in Scotland. Unlikely, but not impossible. Scottish politics has surprised us before.

A Labour-SNP alliance is rather like the Hitler-Stalin pact in 1940

eadric said:

Unlikely, but not impossible. Scottish politics has surprised us before.

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

The Guardian has had a go as well. To be honest, I prefer this to the Times’s version even if it has a few basic errors...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/25/richard-hoare-obituary

That's a lovely piece.

Monkeys said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rottenborough said:

Mexicanpete said:

eadric said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1265022083119054848

Milder than yesterday. They won't be panicking. By Wednesday this will likely be over

If you say so.

People have longer memories than other people think.

Indeed. People who already hated Cummings due to Brexit etc will add this to their grievance list to bring up time and again in the future.

Rest of the country will move on.

Like last election when one side of the debate were dredging up quotes from Johnson articles decades old to rant about how evil Johnson is. Worked out well didn't it?

This is it. No-one reads papers, and when people read them online they don't read the full piece. Meanwhile, the Guardian ran for days and days on Cummings saying he wanted the virus to just run through the population - the SAGE minutes will be released eventually and we'll see if that was true or not, but it sounds like bullshit.

Plus you know someone's a moron if they take a story to the Guardian. An intelligent person would have got a photo of Cummings, out at Barnard Castle, and sold it to the Sun for £1000.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I have to find something to entertain me, not like I'm getting laid at the moment

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I am not pretending, I really am Keir Starmer.

rottenborough said:

Not sure I ever thought I would say this. But thank God for the Daily Mail tonight.

Refusing to grab the dead cat of shops being opened in two weeks.

Top journalism.

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

humbugger said:

A few thoughts:

1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case.
2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant.
3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB.
4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math.
5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong.
6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten.
7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.

Good night all.

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

It's potentially getting into personal life territory, particularly the child's.

Why did a viral parent go, rather than one of the carers?

None of the questions that I ask would breech confidentiality.

eadric said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1265022353987309573

That's one massive Tory-reading paper they've got back onside, as least on the front page.

For all the damage that the Cummings episode has done to the government, there's a silver lining for them. The less sympathetic media took their eye off the ball. Over the weekend the UK drew ahead of Italy in per capita deaths on the official daily stats, and no-one noticed.

The UK is fifth highest in daily deaths today, and may fall lower as the New World reports. That's the "best" score for weeks. We have been first or usually second for yonks

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

It's potentially getting into personal life territory, particularly the child's.

Why did a viral parent go, rather than one of the carers?

None of the questions that I ask would breech confidentiality.

Doesn't that depend on the answer?

(edit: I can imagine possible true answers that would, that are unspoken but implied, e.g. the child visits hospital a lot.)

EPG said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

eadric said:

The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing

Remember this notorious Guardian apology

"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"

"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"


They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted

It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/dec/20/corrections-and-clarifications

Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.

If the Guardian valued their expert virtuous journalist so high, I have no idea how Carole Conspiracy is still employed by them. Her twitter rants are totally deranged, its left wing version of Alex Jones.

At least she's not a lying felon like Guido.

FF43 said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

humbugger said:

A few thoughts:

1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case.
2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant.
3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB.
4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math.
5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong.
6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten.
7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.

Good night all.

Cummings is lucky that it is 4 years until the next General Election and almost a year to the next election of any sort. He is also lucky that we are in the process of coming out of lockdown.

The key question is whether it does any lasting damage or if it all blows over.

The lasting legacies of this episode, I think, will be the phrase "follow my instinct" that will become the riposte to instructions anyone is not minded to follow; jokes about driving to test your eyesight; the Johnson/Cummings regime will bunker down and become yet more despotic.

A bungled Covid-19 response is pretty much baked in, but nobody who rates competence ever votes for Johnson. The risk is if the epidemic takes off again. Then they will be in serious trouble

OllyT said:

EPG said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

eadric said:

The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing

Remember this notorious Guardian apology

"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"

"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"


They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted

It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/dec/20/corrections-and-clarifications

Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.

If the Guardian valued their expert virtuous journalist so high, I have no idea how Carole Conspiracy is still employed by them. Her twitter rants are totally deranged, its left wing version of Alex Jones.

At least she's not a lying felon like Guido.

Exactly, people moan about the Guardian and then quote from Guido without batting an eyelid.

eadric said:

Eeesh. This is not good.

The buggy, erroneous but useful University of Washington covid-19 model - is now whispering about significant second waves, for example, see here in Italy

https://covid19.healthdata.org/italy

rottenborough said:

FF43 said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

humbugger said:

A few thoughts:

1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case.
2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant.
3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB.
4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math.
5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong.
6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten.
7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.

Good night all.

Cummings is lucky that it is 4 years until the next General Election and almost a year to the next election of any sort. He is also lucky that we are in the process of coming out of lockdown.

The key question is whether it does any lasting damage or if it all blows over.

The lasting legacies of this episode, I think, will be the phrase "follow my instinct" that will become the riposte to instructions anyone is not minded to follow; jokes about driving to test your eyesight; the Johnson/Cummings regime will bunker down and become yet more despotic.

A bungled Covid-19 response is pretty much baked in, but nobody who rates competence ever votes for Johnson. The risk is if the epidemic takes off again. Then they will be in serious trouble

If Gupta of Oxford is right then Johnson gets away with all this.

If she and her team are wrong then the 2nd wave will sweep Johnson into a world of shit he is not prepared for.

eadric said:

Eeesh. This is not good.

The buggy, erroneous but useful University of Washington covid-19 model - is now whispering about significant second waves, for example, see here in Italy

https://covid19.healthdata.org/italy

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

Not sure I ever thought I would say this. But thank God for the Daily Mail tonight.

Refusing to grab the dead cat of shops being opened in two weeks.

Top journalism.

Hate to break it to you but that’s the first story on the Mail Online.

Jonathan said:

Anecdata


Caught up with nursing friend over Skype. The wards are getting busier again. 😬

rottenborough said:

Charles said:

rottenborough said:

Not sure I ever thought I would say this. But thank God for the Daily Mail tonight.

Refusing to grab the dead cat of shops being opened in two weeks.

Top journalism.

Because that’s not news which is relevant to their readers?

There's a difference between news and a move in game theory to distract us.

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

It's potentially getting into personal life territory, particularly the child's.

Why did a viral parent go, rather than one of the carers?

None of the questions that I ask would breech confidentiality.

Doesn't that depend on the answer?

(edit: I can imagine possible true answers that would, that are unspoken but implied, e.g. the child visits hospital a lot.)

No.

If the reason to go was to have assistance with childcare, why did a viral parent go into a ward of sick children, rather than one of the aunts, uncles or nieces?

It makes no sense.

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anywhere indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

eek said:

rottenborough said:

FF43 said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

humbugger said:

A few thoughts:

1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case.
2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant.
3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB.
4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math.
5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong.
6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten.
7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.

Good night all.

Cummings is lucky that it is 4 years until the next General Election and almost a year to the next election of any sort. He is also lucky that we are in the process of coming out of lockdown.

The key question is whether it does any lasting damage or if it all blows over.

The lasting legacies of this episode, I think, will be the phrase "follow my instinct" that will become the riposte to instructions anyone is not minded to follow; jokes about driving to test your eyesight; the Johnson/Cummings regime will bunker down and become yet more despotic.

A bungled Covid-19 response is pretty much baked in, but nobody who rates competence ever votes for Johnson. The risk is if the epidemic takes off again. Then they will be in serious trouble

If Gupta of Oxford is right then Johnson gets away with all this.

If she and her team are wrong then the 2nd wave will sweep Johnson into a world of shit he is not prepared for.

There will be a second wave, the only question is when?

Monkeys said:

Stark_Dawning said:

I think Boris has been dealt a mortal blow. The assertion 'everyone will have forgotten about this by the next general election' is so much guff - Black Wednesday happened at a comparable time into JM's regime. Every political setback that followed was simply magnified by that initial fiasco - JM could never shake it off. We've got the fallout from the virus and, probably, a sub-optimal Brexit still to come. Never mind all the other horrors as yet unseen. I can't see how Boris will ever have the space to recover from this.

It's true - during Dom's statement today interest rates shot up to 15% and now they're at 17%, this won't be forgotten.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1265034438645293056

Cyclefree said:

Have you and @Richard_Nabavi ever gone shopping with a woman or been somewhere like Westfield or Trafford Shopping Centres. People spend hours in them.

Charles said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

It's potentially getting into personal life territory, particularly the child's.

Why did a viral parent go, rather than one of the carers?

None of the questions that I ask would breech confidentiality.

Doesn't that depend on the answer?

(edit: I can imagine possible true answers that would, that are unspoken but implied, e.g. the child visits hospital a lot.)

No.

If the reason to go was to have assistance with childcare, why did a viral parent go into a ward of sick children, rather than one of the aunts, uncles or nieces?

It makes no sense.

Because (a) that would be mixing households and (b) they wouldn’t have what I assume is a complex medical history if required by doctors

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Jonathan said:

Anecdata


Caught up with nursing friend over Skype. The wards are getting busier again. 😬

Which area of the country?

inpatient numbers were up in Leicestershire this week, at least on Friday they were.

Andy_JS said:

"Theatre cannot survive social distancing
We cannot follow the ‘two-metre rule’ forever.

Robert Jackman"

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/25/theatre-cannot-survive-social-distancing/

Foxy said:

Charles said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

Monkeys said:

Foxy said:

eadric said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?

I would assume due to length of time spent in them

Yes, proximity, interaction, and weight of viral load over time

The worst places are gyms, choirs, churches, mosques, theatres, cinemas, clubs, dance halls, basically anyway indoors where people are crowded together and panting air through singing, laughing, loudly talking

That is to say: many of the fun places that make life worth living

And hospitals. There are quite a few hospital acquired infections now.

On the subject of hospitals: We learnt two new things today. The first is just comical, to do an eye test by driving for an hour, with your beloved family in the car. The second was Cummings Jr going to hospital, and this seems to be the course of events:

1) family travel 260 miles while becoming unwell, because they needed trustworthy childcare.

2) both parents unwell, then a few days later, child also.

3) 999 called and ambulance despatched (presumably because neither parent fit enough to drive the 5 mile trip).

4) child admitted overnight for tests and observation.

5) Mother accompanies child, stays overnight in children's ward, in breach of isolation rules.

So why did she go, rather than one of the potential carers that they had driven 260 miles to call on? Surely that was the whole point of going in the first place?

Did she declare to the admitting staff that she and her husband were self isolating for Covid-19 symptoms?

What PPE and isolation techniques were used to prevent spread to other children, parents and staff?

It's potentially getting into personal life territory, particularly the child's.

Why did a viral parent go, rather than one of the carers?

None of the questions that I ask would breech confidentiality.

Doesn't that depend on the answer?

(edit: I can imagine possible true answers that would, that are unspoken but implied, e.g. the child visits hospital a lot.)

No.

If the reason to go was to have assistance with childcare, why did a viral parent go into a ward of sick children, rather than one of the aunts, uncles or nieces?

It makes no sense.

Because (a) that would be mixing households and (b) they wouldn’t have what I assume is a complex medical history if required by doctors

surely the whole point of the trip was to have assistance if both parents became sick. As they did.

Your reasons would be valid if they had stayed in Islington.

The whole point of banning people from going to second homes was to prevent spread and spare overloading regional NHS.

The whole story is a ridiculous tissue of lies.