Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why 2023 is the value bet for the year or the next election – politicalbetting.com

1246

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    edited July 2021
    Carnyx said:

    Hmm. So dentists and midwives have no scientific credentials or knowledge? LIke, say, they're still in the good old mediaeval barber surgeon and wise woman era?
    Relevant credentials, like epidemiology.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    RobD said:

    Relevant credentials, like epidemiology.
    They are trained in infection control and know how much they and their patients will be at risk?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    DougSeal said:

    TBF I think that’s Malc’s view as well. If he’s not qualified then who is?
    Yes, but he isn't jumping from that to the no-referendum conclusion (so it's still open to debate).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839

    Shocked i tell you, shocked....

    A scathing letter which demanded Freedom Day be delayed and was backed by more than 1,200 'experts' allowed people with no scientific credentials to sign it.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9784397/Lancet-letter-demanded-Freedom-Day-scrapped-signed-people-NO-scientific-credentials.html

    When will they learn that having Susan Michie sign these things just makes them look stupid?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,105

    Shocked i tell you, shocked....

    A scathing letter which demanded Freedom Day be delayed and was backed by more than 1,200 'experts' allowed people with no scientific credentials to sign it.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9784397/Lancet-letter-demanded-Freedom-Day-scrapped-signed-people-NO-scientific-credentials.html

    Where would we be without the Daily Mail.....Three cheers

    Heil.... Heil.... Heil
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,636
    IanB2 said:


    What is striking right now are the states of the housing market and the labour market.

    The pandemic has forced (or enabled) a lot of people to reassess their priorities, and there is no doubt that the virtues of a cheaper but quieter life away from the ‘rat-race’ of the city has escalated massively, particularly for those in middle age who are already halfway up the housing ladder and able to contemplate cashing in their property price gains.

    The state of the estate agents’ windows, out here in the beautiful but remote wilds, now only able to be filled by displaying properties already sold (in some cases without even a viewing) speaks volumes.

    I hear from New York that the exodus from that particularly urban environment has been more dramatic still.

    So a lot of people have exited the Labour market altogether and others are hanging in there, relying on WFA and WFH becoming permanent changes.

    I predicted peak London back in the very early days of the pandemic, and stick by my view.

    I disagree with Leon here - I'm optimistic about the future of Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Newcastle - it's London I see in relative decline for a bit. The disadvantages of London - the expense, the arse-clenching, fun-sapping expense - are starting to outweigh the positives in a world where we don't need to be physically present quite so much. Whereas your second order cities can still offer city buzz - and, more importantly, exciting and pleasant suburbs - but at a much more affordable price.
    You can afford a four bedroomed house in Altrincham, Sale, Didsbury, Prestwich, Bramhall, Edgbaston, Bournville, Meanwood, Headingley, Jesmond, Gosforth, Cullercoats - for the price of a small flat in Crouch End.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Stocky said:

    @darkage You are clearly as pole-axed by this as I am.

    I could see the writing on the wall as early as March last year. I wrote a header about it. At the time I thought that most people had not twigged the seriousness of the pandemic. All they were focused on was health and they failed to see that we have a new enduring risk in life. They gave no acknowledgement of liberties or the economy - i.e. the wider picture. I argued that making health and the NHS the-only-thing-that-matters was a mistake and the initial lockdown should not have been extended past the original 12 weeks. It was a brave piece to write at the time, but look where were are now.

    Liberals have been caught in a pincer-movement between authoritarian rule-followers on the right and dystopian illiberals on the left. I think that more of the former can be turned than the latter, especially as fear tapers more and more. The latter have revealed that they never liked liberal democracy in the first place - particularly the liberal bit - and there is some glee in constraining liberties under a dominant state apparatus. They are clearly happy for this to endure, perhaps permanently.

    These two groups have the numbers. And we have a spineless populist government who follow not lead.

    It is genuinely terrifying if you are a liberal. Your fears are justified.
    Thanks for this. PB is keeping me sane at the moment, along with a few heroic back bench conservative MPs. My own view is that lockdowns are exceptionally justified where there is an absolute medical emergency; as there was for perhaps two brief periods of time. But now we must regard it as a preventable disease, the prevention being the vaccine. I am coming to the view that the other stuff - the assymptomatic testing, self isolation, pinging, covid apps etc etc have absolutely no place at all in a free society and should be absolutely rejected.

    I know that there are a lot of people who share my fears, but we are overruled by the forces you describe. I am also deeply troubled by this contradiction where people support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves. But if the illiberal pursuit of biosecurity gets taken to its conclusion, that option won't be open to them anymore - they are sleepwalking in to a totalitarian nightmare; and we have to find a way of stopping it.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,959
    Roger said:

    Where would we be without the Daily Mail.....Three cheers

    Heil.... Heil.... Heil
    Pathetic.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    IanB2 said:


    What is striking right now are the states of the housing market and the labour market.

    The pandemic has forced (or enabled) a lot of people to reassess their priorities, and there is no doubt that the virtues of a cheaper but quieter life away from the ‘rat-race’ of the city has escalated massively, particularly for those in middle age who are already halfway up the housing ladder and able to contemplate cashing in their property price gains.

    The state of the estate agents’ windows, out here in the beautiful but remote wilds, now only able to be filled by displaying properties already sold (in some cases without even a viewing) speaks volumes.

    I hear from New York that the exodus from that particularly urban environment has been more dramatic still.

    So a lot of people have exited the Labour market altogether and others are hanging in there, relying on WFA and WFH becoming permanent changes.

    I predicted peak London back in the very early days of the pandemic, and stick by my view.

    Does peak London mean you think London prices will fall significantly or flatline whilst rural prices increase?

    Zone 1/2 flats do still seem down on pre pandemic levels but not by much. Decent houses and new builds still priced at ever increasing prices thanks to govt props.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    Carnyx said:

    They are trained in infection control and know how much they and their patients will be at risk?
    But they aren't scientists that are experts in the field of epidemiology, are they?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,973
    DougSeal said:

    TBF I think that’s Malc’s view as well. If he’s not qualified then who is?
    And there you have a refutation to another great Scotch expert shibboleth, the brainwashed homogeneity of Nat opinion.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    Omnium said:

    Splashing the cash could have no better destination.
    On St P? Oh, I think it has come out very well - and preserved that fine station in a useful role. Though IIRC it was the Marylebone chap who built his Great Central Railway to continental loading gauge. Pity that was never used.

    Anyway, dinner calls soon so have a nice evening all.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    Carnyx said:

    They are trained in infection control and know how much they and their patients will be at risk?
    Is there a missing Oxford comma? “…dentists, and students with no scientific credentials.” That would mean that it’s onynthe students with no scientific credentials.

    I think I should get out more.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    I forecast a peak of 50k. Given schools break up next week, I'd be very surprised if I'm far out.
    54,312 remains the number…
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,959
    edited July 2021
    With these letter writing campaigns i honestly don't see why they feel the need to try and inflate the numbers. It was clear when they said they had got 1000 signatures in a day, it was going to be all and sundry.

    It is much more effective if you have just have a core of widely respected expects in the field. Quality over quantity and all that.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    A Scotch expert as I live and breathe.
    Do you disagree?

    Does @malcolmg ?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    DougSeal said:

    Is there a missing Oxford comma? “…dentists, and students with no scientific credentials.” That would mean that it’s onynthe students with no scientific credentials.

    I think I should get out more.
    Well that rules out the Christ Church dons from having any opinion at all to do with covid.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,456
    Cookie said:

    I disagree with Leon here - I'm optimistic about the future of Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Newcastle - it's London I see in relative decline for a bit. The disadvantages of London - the expense, the arse-clenching, fun-sapping expense - are starting to outweigh the positives in a world where we don't need to be physically present quite so much. Whereas your second order cities can still offer city buzz - and, more importantly, exciting and pleasant suburbs - but at a much more affordable price.
    You can afford a four bedroomed house in Altrincham, Sale, Didsbury, Prestwich, Bramhall, Edgbaston, Bournville, Meanwood, Headingley, Jesmond, Gosforth, Cullercoats - for the price of a small flat in Crouch End.
    A bit of relative improvement of the second order cities for a while would I think be good for everyone. The same phenomenon has been happening for a couple of decades in France and it makes a visit to somewhere like Bordeaux, Lyon, Toulouse or Nantes much more rewarding than it would have been in the past. Meanwhile Paris has been in relative decline since pretty much the 1970s but remains a supremely enjoyable (and supremely expensive) city to visit.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,911
    Carnyx said:

    Hmm. So dentists and midwives have no scientific credentials or knowledge? LIke, say, they're still in the good old mediaeval barber surgeon and wise woman era?
    Do they take into account the incredible damage that each day of lockdown is doing to society? How people are learning to be fearful of others, etc.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Its coming home, its coming home....covid coming home...from the pub after watching the footy

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9792171/Graphs-surge-cases-men-twenties-spike-coincides-Euro-2020.html

    Not just men in their 20's, one guy who went to the semi has now infected his entire family including his mother in law and one of my work colleagues is just waiting to see if his family (who watched the final at this guys place go) down with it too

    Schools also helping the spread - roll on the holidays
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639

    And there you have a refutation to another great Scotch expert shibboleth, the brainwashed homogeneity of Nat opinion.
    No, just Malc, I fully accept that there are other opinions. I’m just saying that it’s Malc’s view and thus not one wholly outside the range of Nat discourse and so perhaps reasonable to adopt? You’ll search in vain for any comments from me on domestic Scottish political matters - I fully confess to knowing very little. But people on here opine on the politics of a number of jurisdictions across the world.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    Do you disagree?

    Does @malcolmg ?
    Feel free to convince us that you can tell the difference between, say, 12yo Bunnahabhain, 10yo Bowmore and 15yo Ardbeg Uigeadail in blind tasting.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,973
    edited July 2021
    @TOPPING
    An interview on C4 News with KSI you might find interesting (at end)
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,911
    edited July 2021
    darkage said:

    I really think we are done in over Covid. My 'live and let live' elderly neighbour, who happily had dinner parties throughout the first lockdown, told me that she now thinks that masks and hand sanitiser should stay for good, as they help with stopping the flu.

    I've been in group chats with university friends and they all seem to believe that the covid rules, including being pinged and covid passports should be accepted and any loss of civil liberties is acceptable on the basis that some people in society cannot police themselves.

    They just don't engage with the fact that the hospitalisation rate is low, when I bring that up they move on to saying it is justifed by a need to protect the vulnerable, who are medically unable to take the vaccine. But the reality is that this category of people are also likely to be at risk from a whole load of other diseases going around and we don't undertake large scale societal interventions to protect them from these.

    I don't know what the answer is, the only thing that keeps me sane is the fact that the kids parents at my sons school all refused one day to wear masks. But I think this pandemic has driven the country mad.

    Ever since Derren Brown first appeared on TV in 1999, I've been worried — though fascinated — by how easy it appears to be to brainwash people. Brown was able to get people to do the most incredible things simply by the force of his character. He could make people drink vinegar and believe they were drinking a normal soft drink, for example, in front of an audience of thousands. He also got someone to confess to a murder they hadn't committed, and others to take part in an armed robbery in the City of London based on mind control. In one of his more recent shows, he got people to push an innocent person off the top of a tall building, (though of course they weren't really going to fall the whole way).
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Carnyx said:

    Indeed. Where the likes of Tess of the d'Urbervilles and Jude the Obscure were born.

    I love it actually - and pay mental homage to Hardy when I am there - but not changing trains unnecessarily.
    That was a lacklustre comeback to your typo "some yeats ago"
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    darkage said:


    Thanks for this. PB is keeping me sane at the moment, along with a few heroic back bench conservative MPs. My own view is that lockdowns are exceptionally justified where there is an absolute medical emergency; as there was for perhaps two brief periods of time. But now we must regard it as a preventable disease, the prevention being the vaccine. I am coming to the view that the other stuff - the assymptomatic testing, self isolation, pinging, covid apps etc etc have absolutely no place at all in a free society and should be absolutely rejected.

    I know that there are a lot of people who share my fears, but we are overruled by the forces you describe. I am also deeply troubled by this contradiction where people support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves. But if the illiberal pursuit of biosecurity gets taken to its conclusion, that option won't be open to them anymore - they are sleepwalking in to a totalitarian nightmare; and we have to find a way of stopping it.

    You are too impatient. Yes, with the vaccines, Covid will be a largely preventable disease, but the vaccines haven't been fully deployed yet, or had time to work fully, for something approaching 15m adults. So we need to put up with the biosecurity measures for a bit longer.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,456
    Floater said:

    Not just men in their 20's, one guy who went to the semi has now infected his entire family including his mother in law and one of my work colleagues is just waiting to see if his family (who watched the final at this guys place go) down with it too

    Schools also helping the spread - roll on the holidays
    Mentally I'm all for getting it over with quickly rather than let the same number of people catch it and get ill over a longer period. Particularly if a bit of overshoot now protects us in winter and/or with any new variants. Scientifically there are probably strong reasons why I'm wrong of course.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,973

    Do you disagree?

    Does @malcolmg ?
    I know the the person with the power to allow a referendum to take place is too cowardly to do so.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,267
    darkage said:

    Thanks for this. PB is keeping me sane at the moment, along with a few heroic back bench conservative MPs. My own view is that lockdowns are exceptionally justified where there is an absolute medical emergency; as there was for perhaps two brief periods of time. But now we must regard it as a preventable disease, the prevention being the vaccine. I am coming to the view that the other stuff - the assymptomatic testing, self isolation, pinging, covid apps etc etc have absolutely no place at all in a free society and should be absolutely rejected.

    I know that there are a lot of people who share my fears, but we are overruled by the forces you describe. I am also deeply troubled by this contradiction where people support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves. But if the illiberal pursuit of biosecurity gets taken to its conclusion, that option won't be open to them anymore - they are sleepwalking in to a totalitarian nightmare; and we have to find a way of stopping it.
    Ditto.

    Though where you say "support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves" I don't think I'm seeing this from the people I know, but that is just my bubble. Most people I know think broadly as we do.

    My original piece for PB is below by the way. The comments are well worth a read 15 months on (you need to scroll right down to bottom). Most were not complimentary.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/01/from-stocky-why-it-should-be-made-clear-that-lockdown-will-not-extend-past-12-weeks/
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,786

    Does peak London mean you think London prices will fall significantly or flatline whilst rural prices increase?

    Zone 1/2 flats do still seem down on pre pandemic levels but not by much. Decent houses and new builds still priced at ever increasing prices thanks to govt props.
    My son in laws parents are both in care, one with dementia, and last september the bungalow was valued at £215,000

    He decided it needed to be sold and last week had an updated valuation of £255,000

    The day after it was listed 5 prospective buyers viewed and he had an immediate full price offer and another one at £257,000 from a buyer who has sold to a first time buyer

    Utterly astonishing but then Colwyn Bay and Llandudno are extremely popular retirement areas
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    edited July 2021
    DougSeal said:

    No, just Malc, I fully accept that there are other opinions. I’m just saying that it’s Malc’s view and thus not one wholly outside the range of Nat discourse and so perhaps reasonable to adopt? You’ll search in vain for any comments from me on domestic Scottish political matters - I fully confess to knowing very little. But people on here opine on the politics of a number of jurisdictions across the world.
    'Nat' is specifically a SNP member/supporter, and really should be called Scottish National Party member (and unspecified 'nationalist' is not very useful given that there are plenty of British nationalists about). Independistas are a wider kirk or rather constellation of kirks than that. The Socialists, a fair sector of the Labour Party (both members and voters), lots of otherwise unoriented, some Tories, some independents, the Greens (a lot of them anyway).

    The persistent use of 'nat' on PB by a certain person in particular is presumably used to try and drive the narrative that only the SNP vote counts for instance when discussing indyref 2 [edit!] when of course the Scottish Greens' official party policy is for indyref.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    I know the the person with the power to allow a referendum to take place is too cowardly to do so.
    it would certainly be remarkable to refuser to fight because the other person was frit.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    IshmaelZ said:

    That was a lacklustre comeback to your typo "some yeats ago"
    Ah - I thought it was a nice allusion to the state of despair induced by the trek from Euston (or even KX).
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    Carnyx said:

    Feel free to convince us that you can tell the difference between, say, 12yo Bunnahabhain, 10yo Bowmore and 15yo Ardbeg Uigeadail in blind tasting.
    True story. My great great great something grandfather on my mum’s side, James Mutter, used to own Bowmore. The family only sold it in 1925 but my branch had long since moved to England. But I still know sod all about Scotland or whisky (even to the point that I had to correct myself after putting an ‘e’ in it in there).
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,737
    Cookie said:

    I disagree with Leon here - I'm optimistic about the future of Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Newcastle - it's London I see in relative decline for a bit. The disadvantages of London - the expense, the arse-clenching, fun-sapping expense - are starting to outweigh the positives in a world where we don't need to be physically present quite so much. Whereas your second order cities can still offer city buzz - and, more importantly, exciting and pleasant suburbs - but at a much more affordable price.
    You can afford a four bedroomed house in Altrincham, Sale, Didsbury, Prestwich, Bramhall, Edgbaston, Bournville, Meanwood, Headingley, Jesmond, Gosforth, Cullercoats - for the price of a small flat in Crouch End.
    This is straight back to the need to undistort the housing market.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    Carnyx said:

    'Nat' is specifically a SNP member/supporter, and really should be called Scottish National Party member (and unspecified 'nationalist' is not very useful given that there are plenty of British nationalists about). Independistas are a wider kirk or rather constellation of kirks than that. The Socialists, a fair sector of the Labour Party (both members and voters), lots of otherwise unoriented, some Tories, some independents, the Greens (a lot of them anyway).

    The persistent use of 'nat' on PB by a certain person in particular is presumably used to try and drive the narrative that only the SNP vote counts for instance when discussing indyref 2 [edit!] when of course the Scottish Greens' official party policy is for indyref.
    Apologies. As I have already said on this thread I try not to comment on Scottish politics. Now you see why.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,556

    @TOPPING
    An interview on C4 News with KSI you might find interesting (at end)

    Argh just seen this will watch it. Who does he want to fight, Joe Joyce? Usyk? Deontay?!!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,636
    Stocky said:

    Ditto.

    Though where you say "support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves" I don't think I'm seeing this from the people I know, but that is just my bubble. Most people I know think broadly as we do.

    My original piece for PB is below by the way. The comments are well worth a read 15 months on (you need to scroll right down to bottom). Most were not complimentary.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/01/from-stocky-why-it-should-be-made-clear-that-lockdown-will-not-extend-past-12-weeks/
    It's quite disappointing the number of people failing to stand up for liberal democracy and for freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of movement, parliamnetary scrutiny, etc. I think I broadly took liberal democracy for granted two years ago when we appeared to have it. I was never one to particularly prioritise a written constitution because I honestly didn’t think any of these things we're under threat. It's very disappointing to realise many of your fellow countrymen see it is quite disposable and are actually quite partial to arbitrary rules, especially for other people.
    If only there was a political party who was prepared to advocate liberal democracy.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    Stocky said:

    Ditto.

    Though where you say "support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves" I don't think I'm seeing this from the people I know, but that is just my bubble. Most people I know think broadly as we do.

    My original piece for PB is below by the way. The comments are well worth a read 15 months on (you need to scroll right down to bottom). Most were not complimentary.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/01/from-stocky-why-it-should-be-made-clear-that-lockdown-will-not-extend-past-12-weeks/
    Just skimmed some of the early comments on your thread.

    "Well argued" from alanbrooke, "Brilliant header" from rottenborough, "A great header" from MarqueeMark, "Good article" from myself.

    Intriguing that you see the response as not complimentary, it was, at least early in the thread (not going to re-read it all!).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Carnyx said:

    Feel free to convince us that you can tell the difference between, say, 12yo Bunnahabhain, 10yo Bowmore and 15yo Ardbeg Uigeadail in blind tasting.
    I absolutely could not. I'm afraid to my father-in-law's great disappointment, his daughter married a sassenach that doesn't drink whisky.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839
    TimS said:

    A bit of relative improvement of the second order cities for a while would I think be good for everyone. The same phenomenon has been happening for a couple of decades in France and it makes a visit to somewhere like Bordeaux, Lyon, Toulouse or Nantes much more rewarding than it would have been in the past. Meanwhile Paris has been in relative decline since pretty much the 1970s but remains a supremely enjoyable (and supremely expensive) city to visit.
    Alistair Meeks will be happy to hear his famous sneaky fuckers have come good at last.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/02/02/a-tale-of-twelve-cities-the-perplexing-underperformance-of-britains-second-tier/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839

    I know the the person with the power to allow a referendum to take place is too cowardly to do so.
    Is that a sideways dig at Sturgeon or an admission that referendums are a reserved matter under the Scotland Act?
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    Carnyx said:

    Feel free to convince us that you can tell the difference between, say, 12yo Bunnahabhain, 10yo Bowmore and 15yo Ardbeg Uigeadail in blind tasting.
    I could certainly do the first two, and would like to try the third if you are offering some...
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Stocky said:

    Ditto.

    Though where you say "support the rules but obviously don't follow them, they keep making exceptions for themselves" I don't think I'm seeing this from the people I know, but that is just my bubble. Most people I know think broadly as we do.

    My original piece for PB is below by the way. The comments are well worth a read 15 months on (you need to scroll right down to bottom). Most were not complimentary.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/01/from-stocky-why-it-should-be-made-clear-that-lockdown-will-not-extend-past-12-weeks/
    Thats a good article, I remember reading it at the time. I suppose the interesting thing is that the economic damage does not seem to have been as catastrophic as we envisaged 15 months ago, given the amount of time we have spent in lockdown.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Just skimmed some of the early comments on your thread.

    "Well argued" from alanbrooke, "Brilliant header" from rottenborough, "A great header" from MarqueeMark, "Good article" from myself.

    Intriguing that you see the response as not complimentary, it was, at least early in the thread (not going to re-read it all!).
    I wrote that it was "always brave to be a contrarian voice. Well done." DavidL wrote "Really good header".

    The response seems pretty good skimming it. Don't knock yourself Stocky!
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,267
    edited July 2021

    Just skimmed some of the early comments on your thread.

    "Well argued" from alanbrooke, "Brilliant header" from rottenborough, "A great header" from MarqueeMark, "Good article" from myself.

    Intriguing that you see the response as not complimentary, it was, at least early in the thread (not going to re-read it all!).
    The complementary comments were mostly to do with the quality of the writing. Many were not happy with the actual argument I was making. A similar header would still be controversial on here today, though less so I suspect.

    My feeling is that the wisest commentator during the pandemic has been Lord Sumption, who has focused on the legality of suspending liberal democracy in this way, and that the public has sleep-walked into something that it doesn't understand.

    I recall a very early-pandemic comment on here from - I think - @FrancisUrquhart - who, when China had locked down (so this must have been late Feb 2020) - chuckled "of course they couldn't do this here". I posted in agreement. SAGE and the government agreed too. Then Italy happened and SAGE, as documented Ferguson, twigged that it COULD happen here. So it did.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,313

    I wrote that it was "always brave to be a contrarian voice. Well done." DavidL wrote "Really good header".

    The response seems pretty good skimming it. Don't knock yourself Stocky!
    Hard to read anyone else's posts PT. Do post more! (ticheek)
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Andy_JS said:

    Ever since Derren Brown first appeared on TV in 1999, I've been worried — though fascinated — by how easy it appears to be to brainwash people. Brown was able to get people to do the most incredible things simply by the force of his character. He could make people drink vinegar and believe they were drinking a normal soft drink, for example, in front of an audience of thousands. He also got someone to confess to a murder they hadn't committed, and others to take part in an armed robbery in the City of London based on mind control. In one of his more recent shows, he got people to push an innocent person off the top of a tall building, (though of course they weren't really going to fall the whole way).
    Thats it - the sense that people are being brainwashed. I hope @Richard_Nabavi and others are correct, that this shall pass once the vaccines are fully deployed; but it does feel like people are being manipulated and are just willing to switch from a free society to a totalitarian one without giving it much thought.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,814
    darkage said:

    Thats it - the sense that people are being brainwashed. I hope @Richard_Nabavi and others are correct, that this shall pass once the vaccines are fully deployed; but it does feel like people are being manipulated and are just willing to switch from a free society to a totalitarian one without giving it much thought.
    The Brits are a generally law abiding and rule following folk. And they don’t like confrontation. Well sorry gang but that’s got to end. If there are rules you disagree with as seriously as you state, then stop following them. And don’t avoid any confrontation that follows, use it as an opportunity to lead and persuade.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,267
    darkage said:

    Thats a good article, I remember reading it at the time. I suppose the interesting thing is that the economic damage does not seem to have been as catastrophic as we envisaged 15 months ago, given the amount of time we have spent in lockdown.
    Agreed, this has surprised me too. Though not all out of the woodwork yet, and we have the massive amount of money we have borrowed/printed.

    The piece was written, of course, pre-vaccine and my view was that government policy should be in line with worst-case scenario, i.e that a vaccine would never be discovered and we had a new endemic threat. This turned out to be incorrect, but it was, I maintain, the right assumption to make at the time.

    The vaccine persuaded me to come on board with the 3rd lockdown (I never agreed with the 2nd) because the NHS was coming under pressure again and vaccines were the light at the end of the tunnel - the silver bullet (to mix metaphors). Nowt it is clear they are not. Look at how the argument in the face of fewer deaths is turning to long-Covid as an excuse to restrict liberties, working under a definition which means that someone feeling a little peaky after 12 week allowed to self-diagnose with this.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839

    I wrote that it was "always brave to be a contrarian voice. Well done." DavidL wrote "Really good header".

    The response seems pretty good skimming it. Don't knock yourself Stocky!
    Yes, generally people on PB were (and still are) lockdown sceptics. I wasn’t popular on here for pointing out in November that a second lockdown including school closures was both necessary and inevitable and the longer we delayed the longer and nastier it was likely to be.

    But I wonder if Stocky was perhaps thinking of the first response, from Foxy, suggesting that the article was framing a false dichotomy. Which it probably was, given if people are too scared to go out it doesn’t really matter what the regulations are.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Stocky said:

    The complementary comments were mostly to do with the quality of the writing. Many were not happy with the actual argument I was making. A similar header would still be controversial on here today, though less so I suspect.

    My feeling is that the wisest commentator during the pandemic has been Lord Sumption, who has focused on the legality of suspending liberal democracy in this way, and that the public has sleep-walked into something that it doesn't understand.

    I recall a very early-pandemic comment on here from - I think - @FrancisUrquhart - who, when China had locked down (so this must have been late Feb 2020) - chuckled "of course they couldn't do this here". I posted in agreement. SAGE and the government agreed too. Then Italy happened and SAGE, as documented Ferguson, twigged that it COULD happen here. So it did.
    I am also a great admirer of Lord Sumption. I just get the feeling that he is from another age and a generation that will soon die. I've got a young son and want him to benefit from the same freedoms we had; the sad reality is that we cannot rely on older people to defend them, we have to do so ourselves. But the people who go on the anti-lockdown protests seem to be madder than those who support the rules!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    Leon said:

    It is possible that the flagpole cities like London and NYC will do OK, as they are SO big and prestigious, people will still want to live and work there. If that happens, it is the 2nd order cities that will suffer much more. Chicago, say, or Manchester

    They don't have the seductions of a New York or a London, but will have many of the nasty issues - crime, depopulation, and so on

    I am particularly pessimistic about American cities. They are fucked
    I'm fascinated by what little I know of how Rome has ebbed and flowed through the centuries. It must have been a weird experience living in it during its worst years.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,973
    TOPPING said:

    Argh just seen this will watch it. Who does he want to fight, Joe Joyce? Usyk? Deontay?!!
    I think he mentioned Floyd M. as I was going to dish up dinner but don’t know how serious that was.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056

    With these letter writing campaigns i honestly don't see why they feel the need to try and inflate the numbers. It was clear when they said they had got 1000 signatures in a day, it was going to be all and sundry.

    It is much more effective if you have just have a core of widely respected expects in the field. Quality over quantity and all that.

    It's a common enough problem in so many areas there must be something in us that just wants to believe something more if lots of people seem to be behind it. These campaigns are silly as someone always emerges who wasn't really on board, or is an idiot and so on. When a better argument well made is more important than 100 fools.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    darkage said:

    I am also a great admirer of Lord Sumption. I just get the feeling that he is from another age and a generation that will soon die. I've got a young son and want him to benefit from the same freedoms we had; the sad reality is that we cannot rely on older people to defend them, we have to do so ourselves. But the people who go on the anti-lockdown protests seem to be madder than those who support the rules!
    Given how his tone of argument shifts wildly once he moves on to Covid, to the point it doesn't even read like the same guy and definitely far less persuasive than his other stuff, Sumption still comes across as a bit mad on the subject, just more intelligently so. If he could maintain the focus and tone of some of his other stuff he'd have been listened to more.
  • GnudGnud Posts: 298

    And there you have a refutation to another great Scotch expert shibboleth, the brainwashed homogeneity of Nat opinion.
    Over now to SNP MP David Linden: "One of the reasons we’re on this league table for the first time is we don’t have those levels of natural immunity that perhaps other people in the UK might have."

    "There’s an awful lot of work going on to try and reduce that virus."

    Go on, David, say "exponential", puh-lease!

    For the record, Ms Divvie, as a responsible adult I wouldn't mind another indyref at all in which one side put forward its best plan for independence and the other side its best plan for improving the union, rather than "Braveheart forever!" and "We only need to get lucky once" versus "You've watched too much Braveheart" and "You don't even know what currency you want" sh*tfest.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    edited July 2021
    Stocky said:

    Agreed, this has surprised me too. Though not all out of the woodwork yet, and we have the massive amount of money we have borrowed/printed.

    The piece was written, of course, pre-vaccine and my view was that government policy should be in line with worst-case scenario, i.e that a vaccine would never be discovered and we had a new endemic threat. This turned out to be incorrect, but it was, I maintain, the right assumption to make at the time.

    The vaccine persuaded me to come on board with the 3rd lockdown (I never agreed with the 2nd) because the NHS was coming under pressure again and vaccines were the light at the end of the tunnel - the silver bullet (to mix metaphors). Nowt it is clear they are not. Look at how the argument in the face of fewer deaths is turning to long-Covid as an excuse to restrict liberties, working under a definition which means that someone feeling a little peaky after 12 week allowed to self-diagnose with this.
    Yes - the long covid needs seriously looking at. I cannot find the articles, but there is a liverpool university lecturer in tropical medicine who had it very bad (ie in bed for 20 hour a day) and wrote about it. He eventually beat it by what would colloquially be described as willpower.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,267
    Cookie said:

    It's quite disappointing the number of people failing to stand up for liberal democracy and for freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of movement, parliamnetary scrutiny, etc. I think I broadly took liberal democracy for granted two years ago when we appeared to have it. I was never one to particularly prioritise a written constitution because I honestly didn’t think any of these things we're under threat. It's very disappointing to realise many of your fellow countrymen see it is quite disposable and are actually quite partial to arbitrary rules, especially for other people.
    If only there was a political party who was prepared to advocate liberal democracy.
    Excellent post - and you've alighted on an aspect I've been thinking about writing a header about.

    "I think I broadly took liberal democracy for granted" - yes, liberals did. My pet theory is that many liberals don't care that much whether we are governed by a moderate CP or a moderate LP. Who cares? - we live under the umbrella of a liberal democracy so we've won already.

    My! The complacency. We never had the checks and balances did we?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    darkage said:

    My own view is that lockdowns are exceptionally justified where there is an absolute medical emergency; as there was for perhaps two brief periods of time. But now we must regard it as a preventable disease, the prevention being the vaccine. I am coming to the view that the other stuff - the assymptomatic testing, self isolation, pinging, covid apps etc etc have absolutely no place at all in a free society and should be absolutely rejected.
    I think that is fair. The measures taken are so extreme, have such imposition, that they can only be justified in the very worse situations, not merely as preventative 'abundance of caution' style situation.

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,322
    darkage said:

    Thats it - the sense that people are being brainwashed. I hope @Richard_Nabavi and others are correct, that this shall pass once the vaccines are fully deployed; but it does feel like people are being manipulated and are just willing to switch from a free society to a totalitarian one without giving it much thought.
    Thing with Derren Brown is this - he is a magician/illusionist. He says he doesn’t use stooges. Of course he says that. And Paul Daniels really can make women levitate, and penn and teller survive being run over by a truck... Remember - all such people lie.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    MaxPB said:
    I know it can become a lot more complex, and introducing religion into the mix certainly does, but in general I've never had a problem with the basic principle that an organisation can require those in a customer facing role to, IDK, dress a certain way, cover tattoos, that sort of thing. Question of reasonable lines I suppose.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,267
    darkage said:

    I am also a great admirer of Lord Sumption. I just get the feeling that he is from another age and a generation that will soon die. I've got a young son and want him to benefit from the same freedoms we had; the sad reality is that we cannot rely on older people to defend them, we have to do so ourselves. But the people who go on the anti-lockdown protests seem to be madder than those who support the rules!
    Yes, I've never protested in my life and half of me wants to go on such a protest but the other half couldn't stomach some of the loons who would be present.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    edited July 2021
    Stocky said:

    Excellent post - and you've alighted on an aspect I've been thinking about writing a header about.

    "I think I broadly took liberal democracy for granted" - yes, liberals did. My pet theory is that many liberals don't care that much whether we are governed by a moderate CP or a moderate LP. Who cares? - we live under the umbrella of a liberal democracy so we've won already.

    My! The complacency. We never had the checks and balances did we?
    Isn't it basically a cliche that liberals don't defend liberalism enough?

    I'm hardly an exemplar of defending liberal ideals, but I'd certainly agree these things have to be fought for just to be maintained - it's easy to slip away from it, in fact it is the natural state of things for most of time.

    I suspect the latter may come up a bit in the next book on my reading list 'The Narrow Corridor: How Nations Struggle for Liberty', among many other things.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    On a different topic, there are literally hundreds of comments chez the Daily Mail today describing the flooding and suffering in Germany as "punishment" for the EU's conduct during Brexit, or joking about it on similar lines. What a truly putrid and decaying culture the entire Brexit process has unleashed for a certain strand of society.

    Whereas Mondays rainstorm in London was God crying about the football…
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    Carnyx said:

    Feel free to convince us that you can tell the difference between, say, 12yo Bunnahabhain, 10yo Bowmore and 15yo Ardbeg Uigeadail in blind tasting.
    Turns out the bottle I have is not 12yo Bunnahabhain: it's 18yo...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,292
    Evening all :)

    I've always been a big supporter of devolution within England so was interested in the Prime Minister's comments today.

    I'm not wholly sure what a "County Deal" is and it doesn't seem the Prime Minister is either. Surrey and Hampshire are not London and expecting Tim Oliver to take over "transport" beyond local buses and cycling seems curious. Are we suggesting for example the County Councils take over South Western Railway? To be fair, they could only do a better job.

    There's no mention of proper devolution such as ending capping and allowing Councils to set whatever Council Tax they consider justified for service provision. There's no mention (no surprise) of handing planning control back to elected local councillors (might be good if you wanted to stop the drift of disillusioned Conservatives to the LDs) and, more important, no mention of moving powers to local authorities and providing adequate resources (public health being one example).

    The problem with County Councils is so much of their funding is taken up by the provision of care to adults and children - until and unless we see a resolution to the provision and funding of adult social care in particular (those the cost of provision of care to vulnerable children is another big drain on resources), the financial question is going to bedevil progress in other areas.

    It also seems the Government has backed away from any talk of ending two-tier local Government and this will be another issue - again, back to Surrey where the Conservative-run County Council faces eleven Districts and Boroughs, many of whom are now run by anti-Conservative groupings. Seeking a common approach to devolution is almost impossible in such a dislocated political environment.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,313
    Charles said:

    Whereas Mondays rainstorm in London was God crying about the football…
    A mere remen-rain-iscance.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Stocky said:

    Excellent post - and you've alighted on an aspect I've been thinking about writing a header about.

    "I think I broadly took liberal democracy for granted" - yes, liberals did. My pet theory is that many liberals don't care that much whether we are governed by a moderate CP or a moderate LP. Who cares? - we live under the umbrella of a liberal democracy so we've won already.

    My! The complacency. We never had the checks and balances did we?
    There's no such thing as "checks and balances". Look at the USA, SCOTUS, voting rights, Texas and more for that.

    Liberal democracy can only survive as long as people want to have it and are willing to fight for it. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberalism.

    Relying upon checks and balances means that people take it for granted and that is when things go wrong.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    Gnud said:

    Over now to SNP MP David Linden: "One of the reasons we’re on this league table for the first time is we don’t have those levels of natural immunity that perhaps other people in the UK might have."

    "There’s an awful lot of work going on to try and reduce that virus."

    Go on, David, say "exponential", puh-lease!

    For the record, Ms Divvie, as a responsible adult I wouldn't mind another indyref at all in which one side put forward its best plan for independence and the other side its best plan for improving the union, rather than "Braveheart forever!" and "We only need to get lucky once" versus "You've watched too much Braveheart" and "You don't even know what currency you want" sh*tfest.
    It was actually the Unionist side who had watched too much Braveheart ...
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    DougSeal said:

    Apologies. As I have already said on this thread I try not to comment on Scottish politics. Now you see why.
    No need to apologise at all - it was a good question (and one others coujld do well to ask).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839

    Turns out the bottle I have is not 12yo Bunnahabhain: it's 18yo...
    Surely a true Scotch expert prefers the 25yo?

    https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/bunnahabhain/bunnahabhain-25-year-old-whisky/
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,203
    Well I am shocked.

    The efficacy of a drug being promoted by rightwing figures worldwide for treating Covid-19 is in serious doubt after a major study suggesting the treatment is effective against the virus was withdrawn due to “ethical concerns”.

    The preprint study on the efficacy and safety of ivermectin – a drug used against parasites such as worms and headlice – in treating Covid-19, led by Dr Ahmed Elgazzar from Benha University in Egypt, was published on the Research Square website in November.

    It claimed to be a randomised control trial, a type of study crucial in medicine because it is considered to provide the most reliable evidence on the effectiveness of interventions due to the minimal risk of confounding factors influencing the results. Elgazzar is listed as chief editor of the Benha Medical Journal, and is an editorial board member.

    The study found that patients with Covid-19 treated in hospital who “received ivermectin early reported substantial recovery” and that there was “a substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in ivermectin treated groups” by 90%.

    But the drug’s promise as a treatment for the virus is in serious doubt after the Elgazzar study was pulled from the Research Square website on Thursday “due to ethical concerns”. Research Square did not outline what those concerns were.

    A medical student in London, Jack Lawrence, was among the first to identify serious concerns about the paper, leading to the retraction. He first became aware of the Elgazzar preprint when it was assigned to him by one of his lecturers for an assignment that formed part of his master’s degree. He found the introduction section of the paper appeared to have been almost entirely plagiarised.

    It appeared that the authors had run entire paragraphs from press releases and websites about ivermectin and Covid-19 through a thesaurus to change key words. “Humorously, this led to them changing ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome’ to ‘extreme intense respiratory syndrome’ on one occasion,” Lawrence said.

    The data also looked suspicious to Lawrence, with the raw data apparently contradicting the study protocol on several occasions.

    “The authors claimed to have done the study only on 18-80 year olds, but at least three patients in the dataset were under 18,” Lawrence said.

    “The authors claimed they conducted the study between the 8th of June and 20th of September 2020, however most of the patients who died were admitted into hospital and died before the 8th of June according to the raw data. The data was also terribly formatted, and includes one patient who left hospital on the non-existent date of 31/06/2020.”


    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    ydoethur said:

    Surely a true Scotch expert prefers the 25yo?

    https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/bunnahabhain/bunnahabhain-25-year-old-whisky/
    To be honest I prefer my bottle of 10yo Bushmills Malt.

    Not even whisky, but whiskey, and certainly not scotch.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839
    edited July 2021
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    I've always been a big supporter of devolution within England so was interested in the Prime Minister's comments today.

    I'm not wholly sure what a "County Deal" is and it doesn't seem the Prime Minister is either. Surrey and Hampshire are not London and expecting Tim Oliver to take over "transport" beyond local buses and cycling seems curious. Are we suggesting for example the County Councils take over South Western Railway? To be fair, they could only do a better job.

    There's no mention of proper devolution such as ending capping and allowing Councils to set whatever Council Tax they consider justified for service provision. There's no mention (no surprise) of handing planning control back to elected local councillors (might be good if you wanted to stop the drift of disillusioned Conservatives to the LDs) and, more important, no mention of moving powers to local authorities and providing adequate resources (public health being one example).

    The problem with County Councils is so much of their funding is taken up by the provision of care to adults and children - until and unless we see a resolution to the provision and funding of adult social care in particular (those the cost of provision of care to vulnerable children is another big drain on resources), the financial question is going to bedevil progress in other areas.

    It also seems the Government has backed away from any talk of ending two-tier local Government and this will be another issue - again, back to Surrey where the Conservative-run County Council faces eleven Districts and Boroughs, many of whom are now run by anti-Conservative groupings. Seeking a common approach to devolution is almost impossible in such a dislocated political environment.

    The problem I suppose is that some counties are sufficiently populous and wealthy to thrive as devolved units in their own right. Kent must be at least a match for Wales in that regard. Or Surrey. Or Yorkshire if you merge all the ridings. Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire would probably all have the necessary critical mass too.

    But then there are others that simply won’t. Cornwall. Cumbria. Rutland. Shropshire. Herefordshire.

    And several marginal cases. Staffordshire. Gloucestershire. Derbyshire.

    Which is why nobody has ever proposed county by county devolution since Henry VIII abolished all bar one of the palatinates.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    ydoethur said:

    Surely a true Scotch expert prefers the 25yo?

    https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/bunnahabhain/bunnahabhain-25-year-old-whisky/
    I didn't ask for a qualitative opinion on their merits (in principle almost impossible between distilleries, even on the same island) - merely a taxonomic assignment.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    To be honest I prefer my bottle of 10yo Bushmills Malt.

    Not even whisky, but whiskey, and certainly not scotch.
    Nothing wrong with it!
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Turns out the bottle I have is not 12yo Bunnahabhain: it's 18yo...
    It is now!
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    There's no such thing as "checks and balances". Look at the USA, SCOTUS, voting rights, Texas and more for that.

    Liberal democracy can only survive as long as people want to have it and are willing to fight for it. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberalism.

    Relying upon checks and balances means that people take it for granted and that is when things go wrong.
    I think the problem you have got is that people on the whole don't seem to be particularly bothered, and we don't have the checks and balances inherent in a written constitution. The unfortunate reality is that it is an elite project; it is the same people again and again who stand up for liberal democracy in its most fundamental form, and suprisingly they are right wing conservative backbench MPs.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,292
    kle4 said:


    Isn't it basically a cliche that liberals don't defend liberalism enough?

    I'm hardly an exemplar of defending liberal ideals, but I'd certainly agree these things have to be fought for just to be maintained - it's easy to slip away from it, in fact it is the natural state of things for most of time.

    I suspect the latter may come up a bit in the next book on my reading list 'The Narrow Corridor: How Nations Struggle for Liberty', among many other things.

    I'm not sure I agree - this has been an extraordinary situation (not unlike wartime). Unlike previous pandemics when the Government decided to basically let the virus run its course through the population (either because they didn't or couldn't do anything else), we had a number of options.

    Technology enabled hundreds of thousands if not millions of British workers to continue working from their own home - that would have been unthinkable just 20 years ago. The same technology and ingenuity allowed a vaccine to be developed, tested and implemented in not much more than a year, an unprecedented achievement.

    Both actions (and others) saved lives, possibly many thousands.

    Has there been a cost? Yes, clearly but economic damage can be mitigated, lives cannot be re-created.

    As liberals, we accept restraints on our freedoms for "the common good" - an overtly individualistic approach is more libertarian than liberal. Liberals accept and understand the value of society and community and sacrificing a small amount of personal freedom to protect the lives of others is entirely justifiable.

    Where I do agree is the temptation of Government to maintain restrictive legislation long after the necessity has passed. Aspects of the 1939 Emergency Powers Act were still valid until the 1960s - it took a brave Liberal to end the fiasco of identity cards.

    Normality has to not just mean taking off a mask - it has to mean the repeal of all restrictive legislation (including anything which ceded control or power to the Executive from the legislature). We can't have Ministers continuing to hold powers which should sit with the Commons.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    Carnyx said:

    I didn't ask for a qualitative opinion on their merits (in principle almost impossible between distilleries, even on the same island) - merely a taxonomic assignment.
    I find that Bunnahabhain has a very distinctive peaty taste, while the Bowmore is less so, but I couldn't tell how old each one was.

    I haven't had an Ardbeg for ages though I do remember it being pretty peaty: I'm not sure I could tell it from the Bunnahabhain.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,674

    Well I am shocked.

    The efficacy of a drug being promoted by rightwing figures worldwide for treating Covid-19 is in serious doubt after a major study suggesting the treatment is effective against the virus was withdrawn due to “ethical concerns”.

    The preprint study on the efficacy and safety of ivermectin – a drug used against parasites such as worms and headlice – in treating Covid-19, led by Dr Ahmed Elgazzar from Benha University in Egypt, was published on the Research Square website in November.

    It claimed to be a randomised control trial, a type of study crucial in medicine because it is considered to provide the most reliable evidence on the effectiveness of interventions due to the minimal risk of confounding factors influencing the results. Elgazzar is listed as chief editor of the Benha Medical Journal, and is an editorial board member.

    The study found that patients with Covid-19 treated in hospital who “received ivermectin early reported substantial recovery” and that there was “a substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in ivermectin treated groups” by 90%.

    But the drug’s promise as a treatment for the virus is in serious doubt after the Elgazzar study was pulled from the Research Square website on Thursday “due to ethical concerns”. Research Square did not outline what those concerns were.

    A medical student in London, Jack Lawrence, was among the first to identify serious concerns about the paper, leading to the retraction. He first became aware of the Elgazzar preprint when it was assigned to him by one of his lecturers for an assignment that formed part of his master’s degree. He found the introduction section of the paper appeared to have been almost entirely plagiarised.

    It appeared that the authors had run entire paragraphs from press releases and websites about ivermectin and Covid-19 through a thesaurus to change key words. “Humorously, this led to them changing ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome’ to ‘extreme intense respiratory syndrome’ on one occasion,” Lawrence said.

    The data also looked suspicious to Lawrence, with the raw data apparently contradicting the study protocol on several occasions.

    “The authors claimed to have done the study only on 18-80 year olds, but at least three patients in the dataset were under 18,” Lawrence said.

    “The authors claimed they conducted the study between the 8th of June and 20th of September 2020, however most of the patients who died were admitted into hospital and died before the 8th of June according to the raw data. The data was also terribly formatted, and includes one patient who left hospital on the non-existent date of 31/06/2020.”


    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

    Wait, a mad conspiracy drug turns out to be a mad conspiracy?

    We should go into bridge sales, these people are such easy marks.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    Carnyx said:

    Nothing wrong with it!
    Actually the Bunnahabhain is now growing on me now I am on my second glass.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,973
    Don’t worry lads, hardly anyone saw it.

    https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1415747756694646799?s=21
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    I find that Bunnahabhain has a very distinctive peaty taste, while the Bowmore is less so, but I couldn't tell how old each one was.

    I haven't had an Ardbeg for ages though I do remember it being pretty peaty: I'm not sure I could tell it from the Bunnahabhain.
    Quite. I prefer other malts on the whole - particularly north of Inverness. My late father adored the Islay malts for their peatiness and I used to buy him a bottle of Uigeadail every birthday and Christmas plus a bottle of something else from the shop on the Mound in Edinburgh for a bit of variety.

    He was also a SMWS member and I'm still working my way through what was left of his SMWS collection. Mrs C wouldn't believe me when I told her the probate valuer for his furniture would need to check it out. She was absolutely staggered when the first thing he did when he spotted the bottles was to fish out his mobey and carefully check the numbers - some of the individual bottlings are worth very considerable sums now. No jackpots for me, but at least I can enjoy them with a clear conscience.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,959

    Well I am shocked.

    The efficacy of a drug being promoted by rightwing figures worldwide for treating Covid-19 is in serious doubt after a major study suggesting the treatment is effective against the virus was withdrawn due to “ethical concerns”.

    The preprint study on the efficacy and safety of ivermectin – a drug used against parasites such as worms and headlice – in treating Covid-19, led by Dr Ahmed Elgazzar from Benha University in Egypt, was published on the Research Square website in November.

    It claimed to be a randomised control trial, a type of study crucial in medicine because it is considered to provide the most reliable evidence on the effectiveness of interventions due to the minimal risk of confounding factors influencing the results. Elgazzar is listed as chief editor of the Benha Medical Journal, and is an editorial board member.

    The study found that patients with Covid-19 treated in hospital who “received ivermectin early reported substantial recovery” and that there was “a substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in ivermectin treated groups” by 90%.

    But the drug’s promise as a treatment for the virus is in serious doubt after the Elgazzar study was pulled from the Research Square website on Thursday “due to ethical concerns”. Research Square did not outline what those concerns were.

    A medical student in London, Jack Lawrence, was among the first to identify serious concerns about the paper, leading to the retraction. He first became aware of the Elgazzar preprint when it was assigned to him by one of his lecturers for an assignment that formed part of his master’s degree. He found the introduction section of the paper appeared to have been almost entirely plagiarised.

    It appeared that the authors had run entire paragraphs from press releases and websites about ivermectin and Covid-19 through a thesaurus to change key words. “Humorously, this led to them changing ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome’ to ‘extreme intense respiratory syndrome’ on one occasion,” Lawrence said.

    The data also looked suspicious to Lawrence, with the raw data apparently contradicting the study protocol on several occasions.

    “The authors claimed to have done the study only on 18-80 year olds, but at least three patients in the dataset were under 18,” Lawrence said.

    “The authors claimed they conducted the study between the 8th of June and 20th of September 2020, however most of the patients who died were admitted into hospital and died before the 8th of June according to the raw data. The data was also terribly formatted, and includes one patient who left hospital on the non-existent date of 31/06/2020.”


    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

    Who did they think they were, the head of the EU?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    Don’t worry lads, hardly anyone saw it.

    https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1415747756694646799?s=21

    "We do not have a company line on taking the knee."

    "On Tuesday a contributing presenter took the knee live on air and this was an unacceptable breach of our standards."
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    Who did they think they were, the head of the EU?
    One of the deadliest threats to any academic is a DPhil, sorry PhD student with the time to go through one's research and really check everything out, if only for his/her own edification.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    darkage said:

    I think the problem you have got is that people on the whole don't seem to be particularly bothered, and we don't have the checks and balances inherent in a written constitution. The unfortunate reality is that it is an elite project; it is the same people again and again who stand up for liberal democracy in its most fundamental form, and suprisingly they are right wing conservative backbench MPs.
    I think our lack of a written constitution is a good thing not a bad thing. As I said I don't think "checks and balances" work, they lead to complacency. If the wrong person gets in charge of the checks then you're screwed. See: SCOTUS.

    The UK has arguably the world's longest and most successful history of liberal democracy, evolved over centuries, and it is the people that ensure it. As we don't rely upon checks and balances so we've got people from all parties vigilant to protect liberalism.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,303
    Carnyx said:

    Quite. I prefer other malts on the whole - particularly north of Inverness. My late father adored the Islay malts for their peatiness and I used to buy him a bottle of Uigeadail every birthday and Christmas plus a bottle of something else from the shop on the Mound in Edinburgh for a bit of variety.

    He was also a SMWS member and I'm still working my way through what was left of his SMWS collection. Mrs C wouldn't believe me when I told her the probate valuer for his furniture would need to check it out. She was absolutely staggered when the first thing he did when he spotted the bottles was to fish out his mobey and carefully check the numbers - some of the individual bottlings are worth very considerable sums now. No jackpots for me, but at least I can enjoy them with a clear conscience.
    The thing about a great single malt is that that you savour it (or at least I do) so a bottle can last for weeks of steady drinking.

    I had a dozen or so bottles of various whisk(e)ys at the start of the Pandemic and I'm only about half way though them now.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    darkage said:

    I think the problem you have got is that people on the whole don't seem to be particularly bothered, and we don't have the checks and balances inherent in a written constitution. The unfortunate reality is that it is an elite project; it is the same people again and again who stand up for liberal democracy in its most fundamental form, and suprisingly they are right wing conservative backbench MPs.
    Our constitution is written. It’s just not codified.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,056
    ydoethur said:

    The problem I suppose is that some counties are sufficiently populous and wealthy to thrive as devolved units in their own right. Kent must be at least a match for Wales in that regard. Or Surrey. Or Yorkshire if you merge all the ridings. Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire would probably all have the necessary critical mass too.

    But then there are others that simply won’t. Cornwall. Cumbria. Rutland. Shropshire. Herefordshire.

    And several marginal cases. Staffordshire. Gloucestershire. Derbyshire.

    Which is why nobody has ever proposed county by county devolution since Henry VIII abolished all bar one of the palatinates.
    The population of Wales is about 3 million. The only county-like entities that would match that would be Greater London, West Midlands, Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire.

    Other impressive counties are relatively titchy. Take Hampshire. Even folding Portsmouth and Southampton back in only gets you to 1.8 million, about the same as Kent and Essex. For comparison, N Ireland is 1.6 million. Other counties are just to small to take on other functions. Cambridgeshire is about 850k, Oxfordshire is 680k.

    Which is why people who look at devolving from Westminster end up creating regions, and the concept of regions makes lots of people cry. Meanwhile England as an entity is just too big to manage well. So we're stuck.

    The other elephant in the room is money. It was bad enough 20 years ago; basically the maximum allowed council income matched the minimum standard of expected services, so there was approximately no political discretion at all. That was before austerity, the 2% rule on Council Tax and the ballooning of social care costs. You have to wonder why anyone in local government bothers any more.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,959
    edited July 2021

    Thing with Derren Brown is this - he is a magician/illusionist. He says he doesn’t use stooges. Of course he says that. And Paul Daniels really can make women levitate, and penn and teller survive being run over by a truck... Remember - all such people lie.
    I have been to several Derren Brown shows. Arrive early, hang about in the foyer and you will work out how a fair bit of the shows are done that involve audience participation. Lets just say it amazing how much people inadvertently reveal when they are excitably hanging around.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,359
    I see the Guardian is knocking out a piece reporting on leaked documents from a meeting between Putin and his offcials suggesting that the policy was to bust a gut to get Trump in in 2016.

    There is something about this story that doesnt pass the smell test. If you are one of those that long believed this was Russian policy and they had Donald's balls in a vice there is nothing new. Its almost like a retrospective rehash of what perhaps is already known or at reasonably deduced.

    Oddly no sign of a single killer or new revelation, which apparently the appendices of these documents may have had. Yet those appendices dont appear in the haul the Guardian has seen.

    That leaves some questions. Who released something that doesnt shed any new light, confirms nothing & reinforces opinions, probably on both sides, of the Trump is a shill argument.

    And why? If you had this document haul, you might have some serious dynamite there, yet the stuff that is hinted at in one reported section isnt part of the leaked docs.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    stodge said:

    I'm not sure I agree - this has been an extraordinary situation (not unlike wartime). Unlike previous pandemics when the Government decided to basically let the virus run its course through the population (either because they didn't or couldn't do anything else), we had a number of options.

    Technology enabled hundreds of thousands if not millions of British workers to continue working from their own home - that would have been unthinkable just 20 years ago. The same technology and ingenuity allowed a vaccine to be developed, tested and implemented in not much more than a year, an unprecedented achievement.

    Both actions (and others) saved lives, possibly many thousands.

    Has there been a cost? Yes, clearly but economic damage can be mitigated, lives cannot be re-created.

    As liberals, we accept restraints on our freedoms for "the common good" - an overtly individualistic approach is more libertarian than liberal. Liberals accept and understand the value of society and community and sacrificing a small amount of personal freedom to protect the lives of others is entirely justifiable.

    Where I do agree is the temptation of Government to maintain restrictive legislation long after the necessity has passed. Aspects of the 1939 Emergency Powers Act were still valid until the 1960s - it took a brave Liberal to end the fiasco of identity cards.

    Normality has to not just mean taking off a mask - it has to mean the repeal of all restrictive legislation (including anything which ceded control or power to the Executive from the legislature). We can't have Ministers continuing to hold powers which should sit with the Commons.
    I wasn't saying accepting some restrictions as necessary was not possible for liberals. I don't think anyone beyond an extreme few are saying that. I was making a general observation that it is sometimes argued liberals are often too complacent that things will always be the way they were. So I'm not sure where the disagreement comes in.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639

    The population of Wales is about 3 million. The only county-like entities that would match that would be Greater London, West Midlands, Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire.

    Other impressive counties are relatively titchy. Take Hampshire. Even folding Portsmouth and Southampton back in only gets you to 1.8 million, about the same as Kent and Essex. For comparison, N Ireland is 1.6 million. Other counties are just to small to take on other functions. Cambridgeshire is about 850k, Oxfordshire is 680k.

    Which is why people who look at devolving from Westminster end up creating regions, and the concept of regions makes lots of people cry. Meanwhile England as an entity is just too big to manage well. So we're stuck.

    The other elephant in the room is money. It was bad enough 20 years ago; basically the maximum allowed council income matched the minimum standard of expected services, so there was approximately no political discretion at all. That was before austerity, the 2% rule on Council Tax and the ballooning of social care costs. You have to wonder why anyone in local government bothers any more.
    1.8 million is three times the size of Luxembourg, nearly 4 times the size of Malta, and bigger than 12 US states, including Hawaii and New Hampshire.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DougSeal said:

    Our constitution is written. It’s just not codified.
    Indeed and the beauty of that is that our constitution is so easily changed.

    Take the FTPA discussed earlier. The PM being able to call an election was a part of our constituency, changed on the whim of Nick Clegg to stop Cameron cutting and running, then that was meant to be a part of our constitution but it didn't suit first Theresa May then Boris, and now its changing again.

    Other countries if they'd passed eg a constitutional amendment like the FTPA they're stuck with it much more than we are in the UK.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    rcs1000 said:

    Wow. LibDems just six points behind Con and Lab.
    10% for the Scottish Lib Dems must be one of their best polls in years. The fact that ragin Wullie is retiring must surely be a factor. Alex Cole-Hamilton might be a lightweight, but at least he doesn’t do that fake anger thing all the time.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,203

    10% for the Scottish Lib Dems must be one of their best polls in years. The fact that ragin Wullie is retiring must surely be a factor. Alex Cole-Hamilton might be a lightweight, but at least he doesn’t do that fake anger thing all the time.
    That poll was conducted entirely before Willie Rennie's announcement.
This discussion has been closed.