After over-turning a 26% deficit can LAB’s recovery be sustained? – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Surprised it was so high?Taz said:
We were in the toon today. In fenwicks, John Lewis and other major stores makes wearing was no more than 20%. Was surprised.RochdalePioneers said:It will be a real struggle to get people to wear masks again because Covid is a clear and present danger having told them that they don't need them because Covid is over.
I was also in the toon today sans mask.1 -
Not up here it isn't. Compliance both in terms of mask wearing and doing it correctly is high enough that some angry looking prannock not doing really makes you notice.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.0 -
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.2 -
Ah right OK. Thank you.ydoethur said:
We don't find out until tomorrow. I assume therefore it is from Monday.GIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?
Here we go again eh?
And good evening PB0 -
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
1 -
Can't be arsed with this mask shit again6
-
Pretty sure I heard the equivalent of "All contacts of suspected Omicron cases must self-isolate for 10 days, regardless of their vaccination status."RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
Dont remember "They will be contacted by NHS Test and Trace."
0 -
I am expecting Sajid to brief Parliament on Monday. They will need to vote on it so unlikely to be law before mid week. We will be asked to follow the requirements 'informally' as soon as the detail is published.ydoethur said:
We don't find out until tomorrow. I assume therefore it is from Monday.GIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?0 -
I heard Boris say thatRochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
Just how do you know most people watching didn't
An extraordinary claim
2 -
It is for faces not arses!Gallowgate said:Can't be arsed with this mask shit again
0 -
Nor in West Wales. Tesco is virtually 100%. It's the corner shops where some people take the piss, by not wearing masks whilst buying cigarettes.RochdalePioneers said:
Not up here it isn't. Compliance both in terms of mask wearing and doing it correctly is high enough that some angry looking prannock not doing really makes you notice.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.0 -
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs0 -
Living in such a binary world must be fascinating. Everything wonderful or completely pointless.state_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.0 -
Today's data. 7 day rate per 100,000. Wales 500, Scotland 364, NI 628, England 434.malcolmg said:
Doubt there si hard evidence but our rates are well below England , last I saw we were running at 35% lower rates than England, so something different.Eabhal said:We've been wearing masks throughout in Scotland. Do we have any evidence that it's had a significant effect on admissions?
At this point the only meaningful thing you can do is close some combination of pubs, schools and inside gatherings, which is basically full lockdown and won't happen unless this really is a problem.
Boost, boost, boost!0 -
For Max England = UKCarnyx said:
As you are a self-stated federalist, that certainly is wrong, whether Max meant the UK or Scotland!RochdalePioneers said:
I quite enjoyed "You have got absolutely zero loyalty, not to your party and not to your nation"malcolmg said:
That response went right over your head then.MaxPB said:
Mate, you've got no fucking idea how the virus works. Look across the continent, hospitalisations and deaths are exploding. They're getting their exit wave in the winter and all at once. The idea that a nation can simply avoid it is something put forwards by simpletons.RochdalePioneers said:
Its been the clear and consistent implication for yonks. No need to worry about it any more, and even if there's 40k cases a day for months and months so what.turbotubbs said:
Who told them Covid is over? Having no restrictions is not the same as saying it’s over.RochdalePioneers said:It will be a real struggle to get people to wear masks again because Covid is a clear and present danger having told them that they don't need them because Covid is over.
I agree that it will be a struggle though. I’ve never stopped wearing masks in shops, so no bother for me, but a lot have.
[edited - sorry, suddenly realised soi-disant had a possible negative meaning, not intended]1 -
Pharmacist in Edinburgh who gave me my flu vaccination yesterday was a nose-outer. Certainly lots of them in Edinburgh and on the ferry to Cairnryan.RochdalePioneers said:
Not up here it isn't. Compliance both in terms of mask wearing and doing it correctly is high enough that some angry looking prannock not doing really makes you notice.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.2 -
glw said:
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
The cost is not low for a start and there is no evidence masks work in the real world beyond a lad experiment - Look at Scotland look at Wales look at Europe. They are a politicians go to for showing they can control a virus which patently nobody can.King Canute would love thisglw said:
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
0 -
Talking bollocks?ydoethur said:
You breathe and talk through your genitals?Heathener said:By the way, Taz masks are not being worn less and less where I live. And I noticed much greater compliance on my train the other day. One couple weren't wearing them but they got a piece of my mind.
Sorry. Wear a mask. It's tough shit. On the grand scale is not a big deal.
There are much more important issues surrounding this e.g. working in offices, policies on jabbing children, travel, lockdowns etc. etc. etc. A bit of cloth over your face is no more an inconvenience than wearing it over your vagina or willy.3 -
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.0 -
I really find it hard to believe any part of the UK is better on the correct use of masksLostPassword said:
Pharmacist in Edinburgh who gave me my flu vaccination yesterday was a nose-outer. Certainly lots of them in Edinburgh and on the ferry to Cairnryan.RochdalePioneers said:
Not up here it isn't. Compliance both in terms of mask wearing and doing it correctly is high enough that some angry looking prannock not doing really makes you notice.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.0 -
I mean I'm fully jabbed and getting my booster on 6th December. If possible I would absolutely not want to wear a mask in the shops again but if it's made illegal not to wear a mask then I will comply as I'm a law abiding citizen (most of the timeGallowgate said:Can't be arsed with this mask shit again
) 0 -
There are far too many stupid people in the UK for sure.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.1 -
Sorry - most PBers going off what I read earlierBig_G_NorthWales said:
I heard Boris say thatRochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
Just how do you know most people watching didn't
An extraordinary claim0 -
Johnson definitely said the stuff about contacts of omicron victims.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I heard Boris say thatRochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
Just how do you know most people watching didn't
An extraordinary claim
Or I am going mad. Which is possible given the day I have had.1 -
My take on the press conference: if the situation is serious enough to reintroduce some restrictions then it's serious enough to make a decision this weekend on speeding up and extending the booster doses, instead of leaving that to the Joint Committee on Vacillation and Indecision.
We're buying time with travel restrictions so that a committee can take weeks to come to an obvious decision.
My wife is taking comfort from small mercies. She detects evidence of learning from previous repeated mistakes.4 -
NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant0
-
No you are not going madrottenborough said:
Johnson definitely said the stuff about contacts of omicron victims.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I heard Boris say thatRochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
Just how do you know most people watching didn't
An extraordinary claim
Or I am going mad. Which is possible given the day I have had.
Boris did refer to it1 -
On topic, the Wiki GE polling chart (pictured in the article) suggests that Labour are a point or two ahead. They aren't. The Tories were ahead in the latest two, and tied the one before. Looking at it neutrally you have to conclude that they are tied on about 37% each, with the recent trend towards Labour.0
-
Johnson said that the fall guy, otherwise known as Javid, would announce the detail in "next day or so".GIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is it being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?
1 -
Its one of a series of measures that we tried when we had nothing else. So, for example, when I examine a witness in a criminal court I am required to wipe down the lectern at the end of my questioning so that my opposite number can then use it "safely". We have known for over a year now that Covid is an airborne virus that does not survive on hard surfaces but the rule remains in force. We had Boris washing his hands rigorously whilst singing Happy Birthday twice but we also know now that this virus is not spread by skin to skin contact. The washing of hands may well help with a range of other viruses and possible infections but not Covid.glw said:
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
I really wish that masks worked. They are cheap, easy to enforce (because they are highly visible) and a relatively minor inconvenience. But what we have found actually works is good ventilation and not doing some group activities such as singing, especially indoors. We need to focus on what works.1 -
I thought Europe was in a covid crisisRochdalePioneers said:
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.0 -
I seem to remember @Cyclefree pointed out there are existing laws the government could have used in this scenario rather than coming up with more - not sure whether it was the Civil Contingencies Act or a different Infectious Diseases Act.londonpubman said:
I am expecting Sajid to brief Parliament on Monday. They will need to vote on it so unlikely to be law before mid week. We will be asked to follow the requirements 'informally' as soon as the detail is published.ydoethur said:
We don't find out until tomorrow. I assume therefore it is from Monday.GIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?
I wonder if Johnson is regretting not going to down that route and having to go cap in hand to Parliament over every change now.0 -
Especially Journalistsmalcolmg said:
There are far too many stupid people in the UK for sure.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On mask wearing the number of people wearing them incorrectly including below the nose is astonishingDavidL said:
I think that they were a perfectly reasonable thing to try. They might have helped as a hypothetical. Last winter, even if they did not help much with Covid, I think that they probably helped us have a very mild flu season when our hospitals were chokka. That very probably saved lives. I would be open to an argument we should try the same again this flu season where our hospitals are busy enough. But I agree with your observation that there is "no correlation with mask wearing".Carnyx said:
Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
The weight of the evidence, to me, seems to supports the contention that mask wearing by amateurs really has a negligible or no effect on the spread of Covid. Its a pity, but there we are.2 -
That is just embarrassingly wrong. The preponderance of the evidence is, masks workstate_go_away said:glw said:
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
The cost is not low for a start and there is no evidence masks work in the real world beyond a lad experiment - Look at Scotland look at Wales look at Europe. They are a politicians go to for showing they can control a virus which patently nobody can.King Canute would love thisglw said:
From what I've read on this masks, and certainly ordinary cloth and surgical masks, have a very marginal effect on the order of a change of the reproduction rate by as little as 0.1. So any effect they have is swamped by things like reopening schools, returning to office work, changes in behaviour due to weather, and of course the higher transmisibility of new variants. It can still be worth asking people to wear masks, as the cost is low, and it might make some people a bit more careful generally.Carnyx said:Prima facie. Different patterns of change at different time indicate other factors also operating. Impossible to separate out AFAIK.Scotland was better than England some of the time - worse some of the time - with no correlation with mask wearing. Ditto Wales. Masks are known to help in principle and in tests. They are a reasonable precaution in the current circumstances.
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(21)00003-0/fulltext
Those may all be wrong, and admittedly the Lancet being on this side of the question throws doubt on the whole thing, but what the bollocking fcuk is this about "not beyond a lad (?lab) experiment"?
3 -
That could be interesting depending on how you define 'foreigners' given how many Palestinians need to cross the border daily to y'know, work and eat and things...FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
0 -
It’s serious in that case. I’m now worriedFrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
0 -
So Pret comes first. Fair enough.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
In our company, we have not perceived any reduction in efficiency or effectiveness resulting from WFH. If anything, people* have spent more time working, during the hours they would otherwise have spent commuting.
And fighting for a space on a train (when it runs) or being stuck in nose to tail traffic twice a day is hardly conducive to good mental health.
*Not me, obviously.0 -
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”1 -
Thanks for that John, so seems England improving as down to 20% higher now and big drop from last numbers I saw though I don't exactly follow closely.JohnLilburne said:
Today's data. 7 day rate per 100,000. Wales 500, Scotland 364, NI 628, England 434.malcolmg said:
Doubt there si hard evidence but our rates are well below England , last I saw we were running at 35% lower rates than England, so something different.Eabhal said:We've been wearing masks throughout in Scotland. Do we have any evidence that it's had a significant effect on admissions?
At this point the only meaningful thing you can do is close some combination of pubs, schools and inside gatherings, which is basically full lockdown and won't happen unless this really is a problem.
Boost, boost, boost!0 -
The egg heads also said this.Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”0 -
That last subclause is either a barefaced lie or a dramatic break with tradition.Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”0 -
Eh yeh. In spades. I've just read a long piece in this weekend's NewStatesman about how shit it all is, particularly in German speaking countries and those nearby.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I thought Europe was in a covid crisisRochdalePioneers said:
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.
They are looking at a long winter lockdown over xmas and well into the new year.1 -
If you go to the website, and click on the graph, you will see it actually still shows the Tories slightly aheadalgarkirk said:On topic, the Wiki GE polling chart (pictured in the article) suggests that Labour are a point or two ahead. They aren't. The Tories were ahead in the latest two, and tied the one before. Looking at it neutrally you have to conclude that they are tied on about 37% each, with the recent trend towards Labour.
0 -
I am a traitor to England in that I moved somewhere else. But I don't think that's what he meant. Not thinking like him and voting like him makes me a Traitor. Obvsmalcolmg said:
For Max England = UKCarnyx said:
As you are a self-stated federalist, that certainly is wrong, whether Max meant the UK or Scotland!RochdalePioneers said:
I quite enjoyed "You have got absolutely zero loyalty, not to your party and not to your nation"malcolmg said:
That response went right over your head then.MaxPB said:
Mate, you've got no fucking idea how the virus works. Look across the continent, hospitalisations and deaths are exploding. They're getting their exit wave in the winter and all at once. The idea that a nation can simply avoid it is something put forwards by simpletons.RochdalePioneers said:
Its been the clear and consistent implication for yonks. No need to worry about it any more, and even if there's 40k cases a day for months and months so what.turbotubbs said:
Who told them Covid is over? Having no restrictions is not the same as saying it’s over.RochdalePioneers said:It will be a real struggle to get people to wear masks again because Covid is a clear and present danger having told them that they don't need them because Covid is over.
I agree that it will be a struggle though. I’ve never stopped wearing masks in shops, so no bother for me, but a lot have.
[edited - sorry, suddenly realised soi-disant had a possible negative meaning, not intended]0 -
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
0 -
BREAKING: Italy reports first case of new COVID variant in traveler from Mozambique0
-
I expect some form of legal 'mandate' to encourage compliance and for people to 'get the message'Charles said:
Saj is giving more detail in the next day or soGIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is it being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?0 -
I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....0
-
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?2 -
There’s a process though. I suspect that a decision that is not based on JCVI advice might be open to judicial review by an anti-vaxxer or somethingLostPassword said:My take on the press conference: if the situation is serious enough to reintroduce some restrictions then it's serious enough to make a decision this weekend on speeding up and extending the booster doses, instead of leaving that to the Joint Committee on Vacillation and Indecision.
We're buying time with travel restrictions so that a committee can take weeks to come to an obvious decision.
My wife is taking comfort from small mercies. She detects evidence of learning from previous repeated mistakes.0 -
Missed the PM. Take it he didn't say everyone should do their best to catch it ASAP then?1
-
I wanted to do the same for death rates, but the Dashboard only seems to do that for "over the whole pandemic" rather than over the last 7 daysmalcolmg said:
Thanks for that John, so seems England improving as down to 20% higher now and big drop from last numbers I saw though I don't exactly follow closely.JohnLilburne said:
Today's data. 7 day rate per 100,000. Wales 500, Scotland 364, NI 628, England 434.malcolmg said:
Doubt there si hard evidence but our rates are well below England , last I saw we were running at 35% lower rates than England, so something different.Eabhal said:We've been wearing masks throughout in Scotland. Do we have any evidence that it's had a significant effect on admissions?
At this point the only meaningful thing you can do is close some combination of pubs, schools and inside gatherings, which is basically full lockdown and won't happen unless this really is a problem.
Boost, boost, boost!0 -
Really? I would have thought she'd be quite pissed off at the ending of her nice little junkets.RochdalePioneers said:
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
1 -
We were talking about masks. Scroll back up the quotes. Sandy said "Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it."Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”0 -
I just commented to my wife as I find it hard to follow and she agreedFrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
0 -
In our company people were really productive for the first 12-15 months but we were seeing erosion. They’ve been really glad to get back in the office.SandyRentool said:
So Pret comes first. Fair enough.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
In our company, we have not perceived any reduction in efficiency or effectiveness resulting from WFH. If anything, people* have spent more time working, during the hours they would otherwise have spent commuting.
And fighting for a space on a train (when it runs) or being stuck in nose to tail traffic twice a day is hardly conducive to good mental health.
*Not me, obviously.1 -
My mum says Leeds are wearing mauve.FrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
0 -
Realistically even if that was the case, when they finally judge this, all the appeals etc, what would happen? It would be done and dusted. We don't have a public vaccine mandate forcing people. You could simply say those that want to get it earlier, they can do, agreed to be at own risk.Charles said:
There’s a process though. I suspect that a decision that is not based on JCVI advice might be open to judicial review by an anti-vaxxer or somethingLostPassword said:My take on the press conference: if the situation is serious enough to reintroduce some restrictions then it's serious enough to make a decision this weekend on speeding up and extending the booster doses, instead of leaving that to the Joint Committee on Vacillation and Indecision.
We're buying time with travel restrictions so that a committee can take weeks to come to an obvious decision.
My wife is taking comfort from small mercies. She detects evidence of learning from previous repeated mistakes.0 -
I assume it has to be announced in the HOClondonpubman said:
I expect some form of legal 'mandate' to encourage compliance and for people to 'get the message'Charles said:
Saj is giving more detail in the next day or soGIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is it being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?0 -
well you can fart around for ever with miniscule measures because it will be forever- last thing you want in this situation is to pretend you can do anything about covid (flu has been around for 500 years , covid will be ) - If you make restrictions more than the illness it is detrimental to society . What a pathetic site it will be for years to come with people being trussed up in masks for no good reasonnoneoftheabove said:
Living in such a binary world must be fascinating. Everything wonderful or completely pointless.state_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.2 -
To be fair “working on it” just refers to effort not effectivenessydoethur said:
That last subclause is either a barefaced lie or a dramatic break with tradition.Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”0 -
My point was that for the months and months that we have been suffering 30-40k new cases a day they haven't. That they are now isn't disputed.rottenborough said:
Eh yeh. In spades. I've just read a long piece in this weekend's NewStatesman about how shit it all is, particularly in German speaking countries and those nearby.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I thought Europe was in a covid crisisRochdalePioneers said:
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.
They are looking at a long winter lockdown over xmas and well into the new year.
As for "a long winter lockdown", there but for the grace of God go we"1 -
I thought there were rules that the shirts had to be significantly different in colour. Given dirty Leeds usually play in White, there isn't any excuse.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I just commented to my wife as I find it hard to follow and she agreedFrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
1 -
But it won't be, and Hoyle will be cross again.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I assume it has to be announced in the HOClondonpubman said:
I expect some form of legal 'mandate' to encourage compliance and for people to 'get the message'Charles said:
Saj is giving more detail in the next day or soGIN1138 said:Evening all
Anyone know when the rules on mask wearing in shops/transport is coming into force? And is it being legally enforced again or just strongly advised?
At some point, if he wants to ensure compliance, he is going to have to make an issue of this and suspend a minister for 30 days.2 -
Seems to me that today was just about messaging “we are doing something” when in reality they are quite deliberately doing nothing to slow the spread. About all there was is the return of mask theatre in limited circumstances which as we know, is not really moving the dial on R meaningfully at this point of the virus’s evolution (if it ever did). Amusing how worked up some here are about others not masking. Just wear an FPP3 and keep your weird anecdotes about cloths over genitals to yourself.
The telling answer was about there being two variants and our strategy for each being different. Essentially, we are continuing with the Let It Burn strategy for Dura Ace, Contrarian and their mates.
While doing some theatre around foreign travel so you can’t blame us in a month or two when Omicron is inevitably 99% of all new cases.
And using it as a chance to remind people to get boosted. Amazing how many people (including on here) still haven’t clocked that the strategy since July has been to deliberately infect all the last pockets of naive immune systems, while giving it a “boost” through modern science.
When is the penny going to drop for the thickos that this virus will be circulating pretty broadly for the rest of our lives? But that things will never again be as bad as March 2020 to March 2021 as it has now ceased to be a novel virus in this country.
3 -
We should force one side to wear masks. That would make things much easier.tlg86 said:
My mum says Leeds are wearing mauve.FrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
1 -
Same comment.Charles said:
To be fair “working on it” just refers to effort not effectivenessydoethur said:
That last subclause is either a barefaced lie or a dramatic break with tradition.Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”0 -
On which. Can I bring forward my booster at a walk-in or not?LostPassword said:My take on the press conference: if the situation is serious enough to reintroduce some restrictions then it's serious enough to make a decision this weekend on speeding up and extending the booster doses, instead of leaving that to the Joint Committee on Vacillation and Indecision.
We're buying time with travel restrictions so that a committee can take weeks to come to an obvious decision.
My wife is taking comfort from small mercies. She detects evidence of learning from previous repeated mistakes.
I am 55 now and booked Online, but was given no date before Dec 8. Exactly 6 months since my second.
The website seems to imply not, but I know some who have had it earlier.0 -
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?3 -
*giggles* I had forgotten about her traitorous actions with her own foreign policy.ydoethur said:
Really? I would have thought she'd be quite pissed off at the ending of her nice little junkets.RochdalePioneers said:
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
No I meant that Israel will say "no-one comes in" and actions it so that it happens. Priti repeatedly says "no-one gets in" across the channel and the day after the numbers are higher. So she says "no-one gets in" and the day after the numbers are higher. And again and again.
Because she is useless.0 -
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?0 -
I imagine her handlers in Tel Aviv tipped her off in advanceRochdalePioneers said:
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
3 -
As the German minister said the other day: "you will be either vaccinated, recovered, or dead".moonshine said:Seems to me that today was just about messaging “we are doing something” when in reality they are quite deliberately doing nothing to slow the spread. About all there was is the return of mask theatre in limited circumstances which as we know, is not really moving the dial on R meaningfully at this point of the virus’s evolution (if it ever did). Amusing how worked up some here are about others not masking. Just wear an FPP3 and keep your weird anecdotes about cloths over genitals to yourself.
The telling answer was about there being two variants and our strategy for each being different. Essentially, we are continuing with the Let It Burn strategy for Dura Ace, Contrarian and their mates.
While doing some theatre around foreign travel so you can’t blame us in a month or two when Omicron is inevitably 99% of all new cases.
And using it as a chance to remind people to get boosted. Amazing how many people (including on here) still haven’t clocked that the strategy since July has been to deliberately infect all the last pockets of naive immune systems, while giving it a “boost” through modern science.
When is the penny going to drop for the thickos that this virus will be circulating pretty broadly for the rest of our lives? But that things will never again be as bad as March 2020 to March 2021 as it has now ceased to be a novel virus in this country.
2 -
Artificially suppressed through pointless restrictions.RochdalePioneers said:
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.
Given that we have no realistic prospect of ever eradicating Covid-19, we are going to have to learn at some point to put up with an endemic level of infection in the population. That wobbly case graph we've been watching go up-down-up-down since July - that's almost certainly the stage at which we have arrived in the country.
We were correct to take the brake off the disease and let it run, because it's probably going to keep running at 40, 50, 60 thousand cases a day forever - and having it spread through the population unchecked for months, especially through schoolchildren, has greatly increased levels of population immunity prior to the Winter months (with all the fears about higher transmissibility, the flu season and the elderly falling over on slippery pavements converging all at once,) which is exactly the approach that the CMO endorsed.
All that's happened in Austria, the Netherlands and elsewhere is they've kept the cases low during the warm weather at the cost of getting them all at once when it's got cold and damp. Stuck with restrictions when we had practically none, and now stuck with lockdowns when we're just starting to talk about masking again. They'll suffer another wave of economic devastation, months more crap remote learning for children, and most of the people who were saved earlier in the year by all the extra rules and regulations will now simply perish in the tsunami wave of death that is to come. Germany's Covid death rate per capita, for example, is already 50% higher than ours and is climbing at a rate of knots.
The sole original justification for restrictions was to save the healthcare system from collapse. Not to drive cases down to nothing, or to stop anybody from dying of the disease ever, but to prevent sick old people from being wheeled into tents in hospital car parks, doped to the eyeballs with morphine and abandoned to snuff it. There were no restrictions and the cases were insufficient to result in tents, so getting rid of restrictions was the right thing to do.5 -
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.3 -
Nah you stabbed the Labour party in the back and now you're going to stab the UK in the back by voting for the SNP. You're so obsessed with the government being wrong that you're actually excited about the prospect that Omicron can evade vaccines. I think you need to have a really hard think about where your life choices are taking you mate.RochdalePioneers said:
I am a traitor to England in that I moved somewhere else. But I don't think that's what he meant. Not thinking like him and voting like him makes me a Traitor. Obvsmalcolmg said:
For Max England = UKCarnyx said:
As you are a self-stated federalist, that certainly is wrong, whether Max meant the UK or Scotland!RochdalePioneers said:
I quite enjoyed "You have got absolutely zero loyalty, not to your party and not to your nation"malcolmg said:
That response went right over your head then.MaxPB said:
Mate, you've got no fucking idea how the virus works. Look across the continent, hospitalisations and deaths are exploding. They're getting their exit wave in the winter and all at once. The idea that a nation can simply avoid it is something put forwards by simpletons.RochdalePioneers said:
Its been the clear and consistent implication for yonks. No need to worry about it any more, and even if there's 40k cases a day for months and months so what.turbotubbs said:
Who told them Covid is over? Having no restrictions is not the same as saying it’s over.RochdalePioneers said:It will be a real struggle to get people to wear masks again because Covid is a clear and present danger having told them that they don't need them because Covid is over.
I agree that it will be a struggle though. I’ve never stopped wearing masks in shops, so no bother for me, but a lot have.
[edited - sorry, suddenly realised soi-disant had a possible negative meaning, not intended]0 -
I have been struggling with motivating myself working from home. Back in lockdown it was no problem, it was the most interesting thing I had to do all day. Now real life gets in the way. As the office is 4 miles away I'm not too bothered and can still work from home if I have, say, a day of Teams meetings or (like Monday) I'm in self-isolation.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?0 -
I think its even simpler, you are either recovered or dead....and vaccination goes a long way to avoiding the later.rottenborough said:
As the German minister said the other day: "you will be either vaccinated, recovered, or dead".moonshine said:Seems to me that today was just about messaging “we are doing something” when in reality they are quite deliberately doing nothing to slow the spread. About all there was is the return of mask theatre in limited circumstances which as we know, is not really moving the dial on R meaningfully at this point of the virus’s evolution (if it ever did). Amusing how worked up some here are about others not masking. Just wear an FPP3 and keep your weird anecdotes about cloths over genitals to yourself.
The telling answer was about there being two variants and our strategy for each being different. Essentially, we are continuing with the Let It Burn strategy for Dura Ace, Contrarian and their mates.
While doing some theatre around foreign travel so you can’t blame us in a month or two when Omicron is inevitably 99% of all new cases.
And using it as a chance to remind people to get boosted. Amazing how many people (including on here) still haven’t clocked that the strategy since July has been to deliberately infect all the last pockets of naive immune systems, while giving it a “boost” through modern science.
When is the penny going to drop for the thickos that this virus will be circulating pretty broadly for the rest of our lives? But that things will never again be as bad as March 2020 to March 2021 as it has now ceased to be a novel virus in this country.3 -
Its depressing as shit. Yes, public health is more important, but personally even in a mostly empty office I'm more comfortable, happy and productive.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?3 -
Isn't that how most people live? A home is just where you keep your stuff and sleep.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?0 -
“This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle,RochdalePioneers said:
*giggles* I had forgotten about her traitorous actions with her own foreign policy.ydoethur said:
Really? I would have thought she'd be quite pissed off at the ending of her nice little junkets.RochdalePioneers said:
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
No I meant that Israel will say "no-one comes in" and actions it so that it happens. Priti repeatedly says "no-one gets in" across the channel and the day after the numbers are higher. So she says "no-one gets in" and the day after the numbers are higher. And again and again.
Because she is useless.
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,--
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”
A sea border was a slam dunk winner back in those days, but as we now see, that was because seafaring in wind-power-only wooden ships is a mug's game. It is a trite observation that if Napoleon had kept up with technology we'd all be speaking French, because the steam tugs were there for him to tow an invading army over in a flat calm by 1800. Given powered propulsion a coast is much harder to defend than a land border.
1 -
We've gone through different phases. At first, there was a sort of Dunkirk spirit - "we must all do what it takes, wfh no problem". Then came general lockdown so people couldn't see friends and family, and there was a lot of unhappiness and frustration. Once that eased, so did the mood, and now there's a lot of reluctance to return to the office, actually especially among younger staff because they tend to live further away (as rent is so expensive in Surrey) so they are faced with an unwelcome return to long commutes. And a lot of people have adjusted their lives to wfh, with reduced childcare costs etc. I can't see us ever going back to 5-day office work.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
I think there may be a divide by location here. Your team is I think in London, where there is more flat-sharing and also better public transport. We will be restarting a hybrid model (typically 2-3 days a week in the office), but only from March. I live 10 minutes from work and don't really care, but I get that someone 60 minutes away is really not keen.1 -
What else do you do in your home?dixiedean said:
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.
People who claim to "live" at home are sad, deluded, asocial individuals0 -
Think I'll be in the office come what may, we've got a maternity cover, new orders generally in & year end to deal with
It's not really possible for me to manage all that from home0 -
There's another scenario: we ran high levels during summer to try to reduce the severity over winter, only for a new variant to come along and make that pointless. I hope that isn't going to be the case - and I doubt it will be - but the probability appears much higher than it was last month.pigeon said:
Artificially suppressed through pointless restrictions.RochdalePioneers said:
Almost all of Europe has benefited from months of very low Covid ratesstate_go_away said:
All of Europe has been facemasking and they are now all in lockdown - they do sod allydoethur said:
The only thing I can think of as a sort of general anecdote in their favour is that while they were compulsory in schools - which overwhelming evidence shows are the main vector of transmission - cases actually remained pretty low.DavidL said:
We have had a large scale real time experiment on this. Both Scotland and Wales have required much more mask wearing by law than England for some months now. In my experience there has been large scale, if decreasing, compliance with the law. If masks worked there really should be a clear and unequivocal change in the infection rate by now. But there is no evidence of this. Scotland actually went to a much higher rate than England although they have come down a bit since.Philip_Thompson said:
There's an awful lot of selfish wankers wanting to inflict masks upon others in this country.Heathener said:
There are an awful lot of selfish wankers not wearing masks in this country.pigeon said:
There are an awful lot of wankers trying to hype this up for clickbait.rottenborough said:Media desperate for a new round of restrictions.
The onus now must surely be on those contending that masks used by the general public, as opposed to by professionals in medical settings, are useful. I would like to see their evidence. If they have a compelling case that other confounding factors are why we are not seeing this differentiation in 2 different countries I would really like to see it.
When they were removed, case numbers climbed rapidly.
Now that's not bad evidence that - contrary to what I would dearly wish - they can be quite effective.
However, there is another question. Is the considerable damage and inconvenience they can cause - particularly to those who, like me, are somewhat deaf and rely on lip reading to communicate effectively - worth the impact on transmission?
I would argue, not up to this moment.
What hasn't been laid out yet is clear evidence that this new form of the virus changes that.
Given that we have no realistic prospect of ever eradicating Covid-19, we are going to have to learn at some point to put up with an endemic level of infection in the population. That wobbly case graph we've been watching go up-down-up-down since July - that's almost certainly the stage at which we have arrived in the country.
We were correct to take the brake off the disease and let it run, because it's probably going to keep running at 40, 50, 60 thousand cases a day forever - and having it spread through the population unchecked for months, especially through schoolchildren, has greatly increased levels of population immunity prior to the Winter months (with all the fears about higher transmissibility, the flu season and the elderly falling over on slippery pavements converging all at once,) which is exactly the approach that the CMO endorsed.
All that's happened in Austria, the Netherlands and elsewhere is they've kept the cases low during the warm weather at the cost of getting them all at once when it's got cold and damp. Stuck with restrictions when we had practically none, and now stuck with lockdowns when we're just starting to talk about masking again. They'll suffer another wave of economic devastation, months more crap remote learning for children, and most of the people who were saved earlier in the year by all the extra rules and regulations will now simply perish in the tsunami wave of death that is to come. Germany's Covid death rate per capita, for example, is already 50% higher than ours and is climbing at a rate of knots.
(Snip)1 -
Isn't that Mark Zuckerbergs vision for us all in the future?JohnLilburne said:
What else do you do in your home?dixiedean said:
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.
People who claim to "live" at home are sad, deluded, asocial individuals1 -
"as uncertainty reigns over Biden's future and Harris is increasingly regarded as a busted flush, I very much doubt either of them would be given a clear run for the Democratic nomination.
Seven names were mentioned to me this week as likely contenders — and the presidential election is still three years way.
There is every prospect that the Democratic primaries will be a bloodbath."
Andrew Neil (Mail)0 -
And the majority.JohnLilburne said:
What else do you do in your home?dixiedean said:
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.
People who claim to "live" at home are sad, deluded, asocial individuals1 -
Well your quote was “he can’t announce critical stuff” (I paraphrase) and you included a tweet about self isolation.RochdalePioneers said:
We were talking about masks. Scroll back up the quotes. Sandy said "Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it."Charles said:
I was watching the BBC and I heard it.RochdalePioneers said:
Most people who were watching don't seem to have heard that. Perhaps you are here to correct the record and tell us that whilst we didn't hear that we definitely did.Charles said:
He said that.RochdalePioneers said:
He can't even fucking announce critical stuff, what a tool https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1464646583862149121FrancisUrquhart said:
That's not quite what he said, he said tightening of the rules.SandyRentool said:Sky's on-screen caption claims that the PM said masks will be mandatory. I didn't hear it.
It was in the middle of a garbled answer (no surprise there) but he said it.
Something like “we will want all of the contacts of people who are confirmed case of omnicrom, they will be required to self isolate, test and trace is working on that now”
On masks he didn’t say they were to be mandatory. He said that they were bringing them back for transport and retail only, and that Saj would announce more detail In the next day or so0 -
Yes, I completely accept and understand for some people working at home doesn't, as it were, work.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
I have never and would never advocate forced working from home - nor, conversely, would I support anyone being forced back to working at an office desk.
The work-life balance, much talked about and theorised in recent times, now has to be put into practice.
Within that there's what could be called the work-work balance - the balance between the networking, collaborative, inspirational activities best achieved via physical presence and contact and the more routine administrative tasks as well as those requiring concentration and reflection which, I would argue, are best done remotely or in a different environment.
It's going to be different for every individual and organisation but the ergonomic impact is already being seen - office workspaces are being re-designed away from banks of desks to more collaborative, networking spaces including meeting rooms. Thoughtful organisations are therefore re-purposing their space to best fit this new work pattern.0 -
Are you one of those PBers who think they live on the edge because they go to a pub-turned-incompetent-restaurant once a week for the sea bream sur un lit de fennel?JohnLilburne said:
What else do you do in your home?dixiedean said:
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.
People who claim to "live" at home are sad, deluded, asocial individuals0 -
Blimey. You actually think that way? Bizarre.MaxPB said:
Nah you stabbed the Labour party in the back and now you're going to stab the UK in the back by voting for the SNP. You're so obsessed with the government being wrong that you're actually excited about the prospect that Omicron can evade vaccines. I think you need to have a really hard think about where your life choices are taking you mate.RochdalePioneers said:
I am a traitor to England in that I moved somewhere else. But I don't think that's what he meant. Not thinking like him and voting like him makes me a Traitor. Obvsmalcolmg said:
For Max England = UKCarnyx said:
As you are a self-stated federalist, that certainly is wrong, whether Max meant the UK or Scotland!RochdalePioneers said:
I quite enjoyed "You have got absolutely zero loyalty, not to your party and not to your nation"malcolmg said:
That response went right over your head then.MaxPB said:
Mate, you've got no fucking idea how the virus works. Look across the continent, hospitalisations and deaths are exploding. They're getting their exit wave in the winter and all at once. The idea that a nation can simply avoid it is something put forwards by simpletons.RochdalePioneers said:
Its been the clear and consistent implication for yonks. No need to worry about it any more, and even if there's 40k cases a day for months and months so what.turbotubbs said:
Who told them Covid is over? Having no restrictions is not the same as saying it’s over.RochdalePioneers said:It will be a real struggle to get people to wear masks again because Covid is a clear and present danger having told them that they don't need them because Covid is over.
I agree that it will be a struggle though. I’ve never stopped wearing masks in shops, so no bother for me, but a lot have.
[edited - sorry, suddenly realised soi-disant had a possible negative meaning, not intended]
"Excited by the prospect that Omicron can evade vaccines".
For "excited" substitute "very worried".0 -
John, a bit more pleasant though if you have spare rooms for an office, gym etc , nice garden back and front and enough space to wander about, have your french doors open , birds singing , etcJohnLilburne said:
Isn't that how most people live? A home is just where you keep your stuff and sleep.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?1 -
The idea anyone would spend their Saturday early evening watching Brighton play Leeds is the aspect I'm finding hard to follow.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I just commented to my wife as I find it hard to follow and she agreedFrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
1 -
My malaise lasted almost exactly 24 hours, and peaked at about Hour 16. It ain't nice, but it is brief - in mostboulay said:
Managed to get my booster today (AZ,AZ,Pfizer) as wanted to be fully tooled up ahead of December party season!MaxPB said:
Indeed, I'd love to get my booster before Xmas. My wife wants to get her one done too.FrancisUrquhart said:Whitty says the discovery of omicron "really changes the risk-benefit calculations" over booster vaccines for the under-40s. JCVI will come back with its conclusions "rapidly", he adds.
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1464647034242228234?s=20
Just bloody get on with it....
Aching a bit this afternoon but the mother of all headaches has attacked now…..
Alcohol does help if you have the strength to lift a wine glass; but not too much0 -
Really? Hitler didn't seem to find it so. The Wehrmacht forced the supposedly impenetrable Ardennes with comparative ease but were balked by the Strait of Dover.IshmaelZ said:
“This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle,RochdalePioneers said:
*giggles* I had forgotten about her traitorous actions with her own foreign policy.ydoethur said:
Really? I would have thought she'd be quite pissed off at the ending of her nice little junkets.RochdalePioneers said:
Priti literally breathless in wonder at such a concept.FrancisUrquhart said:NEW: Israel considering to close its border to all foreigners due to new coronavirus variant
No I meant that Israel will say "no-one comes in" and actions it so that it happens. Priti repeatedly says "no-one gets in" across the channel and the day after the numbers are higher. So she says "no-one gets in" and the day after the numbers are higher. And again and again.
Because she is useless.
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,--
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”
A sea border was a slam dunk winner back in those days, but as we now see, that was because seafaring in wind-power-only wooden ships is a mug's game. It is a trite observation that if Napoleon had kept up with technology we'd all be speaking French, because the steam tugs were there for him to tow an invading army over in a flat calm by 1800. Given powered propulsion a coast is much harder to defend than a land border.0 -
Ah, you mean engineers.JohnLilburne said:
What else do you do in your home?dixiedean said:
Yep. Big enough to eat, sleep and sh*t in.RochdalePioneers said:
Not surprised. So many people live in flats not designed to live in. The assumption is that you're out at work all day and out having a social life half the rest of the time.Charles said:
Personal anecdotes only, but there are people who have really struggled with lockdown. I’ve also seen my team - many of whom were young and in shared flats - finding WFH very difficultstodge said:
Those who seem most anxious to get people back to offices seem to be commercial property owners, developers and their clients.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
Do you have a scintilla of objective evidence for the point about mental health? I hear this quite often, again from those with a vested interest in having people back in office buildings working like battery hens at banks of desks but presumably free of mental health issues (apparently)?
Do something about the dire state of housing and many, many other issues disappear.
But nobody will.
People who claim to "live" at home are sad, deluded, asocial individuals
But seriously: who the f*ck are you to judge others in that manner? I could turn that around and say that perhaps people who *have* to be sociable all the time are just sad, shallow, deluded individuals? Ones who cannot even be happy in their own company?
I've known all combinations: people who are happy in their own company, and those who are lonely and could really do with getting out more. Those who say they have thousands of friends, but cannot name them; who desperately phone people up mid-afternoon to arrange going out somewhere - anywhere. And those who are genuinely gregarious and happy.
That's the key thing: whatever makes someone happy. If they're happy and content in their own company, what's the harm?1 -
Fair commentstodge said:
The idea anyone would spend their Saturday early evening watching Brighton play Leeds is the aspect I'm finding hard to follow.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I just commented to my wife as I find it hard to follow and she agreedFrancisUrquhart said:I see Brighton are playing in blue and white...and Leeds are playing in...blue and white....
0 -
We now have a company policy that most people should be in, typically 50% of their working week. Most of our team aren't too keen on this, but are all going in on a Wednesday. A couple of people, with a poor set up at home, go inmost days.Charles said:
In our company people were really productive for the first 12-15 months but we were seeing erosion. They’ve been really glad to get back in the office.SandyRentool said:
So Pret comes first. Fair enough.Charles said:
2 has great cost to the economy and personal mental healthSandyRentool said:So which has a greater impact on reducing spread:
1. Somebody travelling to work on the train while wearing a mask
2. The same person WFH
I vote for 2. Bozo's policy is 1.
Government is about trade offs
In our company, we have not perceived any reduction in efficiency or effectiveness resulting from WFH. If anything, people* have spent more time working, during the hours they would otherwise have spent commuting.
And fighting for a space on a train (when it runs) or being stuck in nose to tail traffic twice a day is hardly conducive to good mental health.
*Not me, obviously.0
This discussion has been closed.