Introducing the LAB-LD “pact” that doesn’t exist and won’t – politicalbetting.com

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

bigjohnowls said:

Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.

Comfortable Labour hold I think

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

You just don’t have a very inquiring mind. It’s not your nature. This is not a political point let alone an insult. Some of my friends (of various political persuasions) are exactly the same. They’ve got a set of opinions they formed quite young, they’re not particularly interested in anything that challenges them. They don’t want to know. Better things to do.

They’re far from stupid, but they’re narrow in thinking. Settled. The kind of person you might want as an accountant. But definitely not the sort of person you’d want as a journalist

Conversely, you really wouldn’t want me as your accountant. I’d get overexcited on Day 3 and tell you to invest everything in Doge just before it crashes, making you bankrupt

The world needs all types

Taz said:

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

bigjohnowls said:

Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.

Comfortable Labour hold I think

Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.

alex_ said:

tlg86 said:

Not sure if this will work for everyone, but check out London News:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live/bbcone

Go to 18:34

Javid was confronted by a doctor who doesn't want to be vaccinated. Normally politicians come off looking bad in such circumstances, but on this occasion, I think it looks good for Javid.

I’ve mentioned before that opponents of NHS vaccine mandates (because of impact on staff shortages) are on dangerous ground when they come from the same groups also so (justifiably) despairing at the number of unvaxxed Covid victims they have to deal with.

Theuniondivvie said:

John Currin is a painter who tippy toes the line between erotic and pornographic (subjective measures I know); nsfw or in front of your gran I would advise. His prices are in the millions which of course makes him completely legit.

https://tinyurl.com/2p92rbsf

dixiedean said:

Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

Sandpit said:

pigeon said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

How this plays out for him I really do not know

Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.

All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.

kinabalu said:

MrEd said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.

Alphabet_Soup said:

Carnyx said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

Carnyx said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

IshmaelZ said:

Leon said:

IshmaelZ said:

Roger said:

Leon said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Leon said:

MoonRabbit said:

Leon said:

As we are FINALLY TALKING ABOUT BOTTOMS, at least in the fine arts, here is one of my favourites. A Portrait of Louise O’Murphy, by Boucher

I saw a television drama doc where they found this model and made this painting, the actress had an even better bottom and longer more slender legs.

I’ve been obsessed by the female nude just about all my life. Painted millions And I have posed, but never like this though, that pose is just so naughty. But it makes beautiful painting from this angle.

It is a sensationally erotic painting. One of the sexiest ever. Yet in its way quite innocent. Not “pornographic”

My ex arguably had a peachier bottom than O’Murphy, and longer legs, likewise. No wonder the photographer got quite hot under her Sapphic collar

Is that painting erotic? My reaction is to wonder what happened to her right thigh.

Then you should post a painting that you DO find erotic. Go on, it might be fun

It’s such a pleasant distraction from ICU occupancy and booster rates

I saw this artist recently in Venice. Specialises in superheroes

https://superrare.com/artwork-v2/in-bocca-al-lupo-31078

Bloody hell, Roger, you realise we could all be doing stretches for having a copy of that in our cache?

Sincere question: is that true? Could that image get you into trouble? It’s clearly a cartoon not a real person (however alarming)

It’s mad if you could go to jail for merely looking at a cartoon. The artist might need therapy, however

No, sorry I am wrong (hold the front page!)

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/extreme-pornography

It is a requirement that "A reasonable person looking at the image would think that the persons or animals were real."

A cartoon of Rupert Bear violating an old lady was central to the Oz trial in 1971.

I remember Rupert but not that part. I was at school at the time and one of my schoolmates had a copy of that Oz issue.

It was the schoolkids angle that did for them. In a moment of madness I joined a demo after the verdict which Felix Dennis addressed. He'd been given a short back and sides in prison which seemed particularly shocking. John and Yoko were there too. The only demo JL ever attended, apparently.

Schoolkids as in the drawings or schoolkids as guest editors? Don't remember the former.

As guest editors. And it was emblazoned the 'Schoolkids Issue', so it was regarded as deliberate corruption of minors. Much of the illustration (not Rupert Bear) was influenced by Aubrey Beardsley so it didn't overstep the line for an adult readership in the 1970s. But for children? Definitely not.

stodge said:

dixiedean said:

Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?
That is the comfortable Labour hold. As well as the speculation. Which I've just done.

So much will depend on the mood music and candidate selection.

There is for me an obvious candidate for the Conservatives.

dixiedean said:

Sandpit said:

pigeon said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

How this plays out for him I really do not know

Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.

All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.

Hang on.
We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

Applicant said:

MarqueeMark said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.

The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.

How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.

dixiedean said:

Andy_JS said:

Taz said:

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

bigjohnowls said:

Interesting by election in Birmingham Erdington

Sad news. RIP Jack Dromey.

Lab 50%, Con 40%, Brexit 4%, LD 4%, Green 2%.

Comfortable Labour hold I think

Labour will easily increase their majority in percentage terms.

Some parts of the seat have been trending Conservative recently.

Yes. This is 70% Leave territory. And the Midlands is where the Tories are still going forward.
I'd have a Labour hold as favourite. But I don't think it's a slam dunk. Candidates will be vital.
Don't the Tories have a Birmingham resident with very recent by election experience?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Data suggests around 98% of UK now have some level of immunity (both natural and vaccinated) - meaning that even if infected again- will have milder disease. This is hopefully why hospitalisations have not so far risen as fast as feared.

https://twitter.com/timspector/status/1479514782336229376?s=20

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

Owen on Tony Blair -
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/labour-tony-blair-prime-minister-grassroots

He keeps me honest, Jones does. If ever I drift towards 'centrism' his columns slap me in the chops.

People may not like Blair personally but repudiating him would be mad for Labour as it would reek of Corbyn-era far leftery. For myself, I disagreed violently with Blair on Iraq to the point of some light civil disobedience but I can't find it in my heart to hate someone who did a lot of good in power and is the only Labour leader to win an election in my fucking lifetime.

BigRich said:

According to Wikipedia the conservative candidate for each of the last 4 General Elections has been the same chap. at a guess he will what to stand again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Erdington_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

alex_ said:

Applicant said:

MarqueeMark said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

Outlier in a purely good way. Drakeford should be taking notes.

The way that the four nations have had different sets of Covid - for purely internal political point-scoring - should have been squashed at the very outset.

How, though? There's too much benefit to the Scottish and Welsh administrations to pander to Anglophobic sentiment.

Even with a symmetric devolution settlement, a federal UK government would have struggled to get consistency between the four nations' governments.

I’ve read it written that the key was the U.K. not using the Civil Contingencies Act (which had considerable parliamentary safeguards) in favour of modifying existing public health acts and new legislation. Had they used the former the devolved admin would have had little ability to deviate legislatively.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

You just don’t have a very inquiring mind. It’s not your nature. This is not a political point let alone an insult. Some of my friends (of various political persuasions) are exactly the same. They’ve got a set of opinions they formed quite young, they’re not particularly interested in anything that challenges them. They don’t want to know. Better things to do.

They’re far from stupid, but they’re narrow in thinking. Settled. The kind of person you might want as an accountant. But definitely not the sort of person you’d want as a journalist

Conversely, you really wouldn’t want me as your accountant. I’d get overexcited on Day 3 and tell you to invest everything in Doge just before it crashes, making you bankrupt

The world needs all types

I am a bit lazy, that's true. I'm curious, incredibly so, but too rarely can I be arsed to satisfy it. So I have to rely on my instincts. They're spookily good, luckily, but I would benefit from more elbow and less grease. My PB posts probably would too. Let's see if I can move somewhat in that direction. Starting tomorrow.

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

MrEd said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.

Really?

I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

Andy_JS said:

Erdington was 63% Leave, compared to 59% in North Shropshire.

alex_ said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

stodge said:

Evening all

Just updating the latest French Presidential poll:

Macron: 25%
Le Pen: 17% (+1)
Pécresse: 17%
Zemmour: 12% (-1)
Melanchon: 9%
Jadot: 7%

I don't know if this will be one of the big political betting events of the year but it's certainly fascinating to see who will join Macron in the second round of the election.

TimT said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.

pigeon said:

alex_ said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

Is there actually a lot of evidence that even boosters have much impact on severe outcomes? And therefore “booster waning” isn’t really a thing to be that concerned about (as JCVI doesn’t appear to be - noting only that it increases chances of contracting infection)

According to reports, protection from severe disease is 70% after three months following the second dose, but 90% after three months following the third. If these data are correct then the boosters clearly have value, as the Government and its advisers have been seeking to emphasise.

Leon said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

We have no idea how much resistance there is to the flu jab, because it’s entirely voluntary. No pressure. Those who want it, get it

The VAX is very different. New, strange, controversial and becoming mandatory across the world. And there are hints we might need 2 or 3 every year forever?

dixiedean said:

Theuniondivvie said:

dixiedean said:

Sandpit said:

pigeon said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

England is a “global outlier” in the fight against the Omicron wave of coronavirus because of its anti-restrictions stance, Wales’s First Minister Mark Drakeford has said.

He isn't very bright is he....if you are going to make some shit up, you as well make it hard to check.

He is quite extraordinarily out of touch and increasingly sounding so

How this plays out for him I really do not know

Attacking English policy is, of course, a smart move. It's not going to convince people like you who think he's called it wrong, but consider:

1. It reinforces the justification for his own policy (I was being responsible, Johnson was being reckless)
2. 'Wales was right, the English got it wrong' is always a message that's going to play well with Drakeford's core support
3. An awful lot of people have been, and many still are, very frightened and adore restrictions (especially on things that other people enjoy but which they consider frivolous, expendable and, in some cases, would like to see banned permanently)

If Wales had the necessary fiscal autonomy to have declared another hard lockdown before Christmas then Drakeford would almost certainly have done so, and all those receptive to the above arguments would've been delighted. I doubt very much that his handling of the pandemic is going to do him any harm at all.

All of which works fine for Drakeford - until the reality hits home of the national rugby team decamping across the border, so they can play in front of a crowd of paying spectators.

Hang on.
We are 36 days before Wales has a 6N home game.
Roughly the same amount of time since we first heard of Omicron.
Needless to say, a heck of a lot can happen before then.
Weren't we also warned Newcastle would be overrun by Scots on NYE as well?

Always check on who is doing the warning.

Yes. Linked to this the other day. Chronicle report on NYE.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/new-year-newcastle-clean-up-22620202.amp

It was an article of faith that Newcastle would be heaving.

MrEd said:

Sandpit said:

dixiedean said:

Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

MrEd said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.

Really?

I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.

Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.

Normally, blokes claim its head AND heart. Take HYUFD, for example. In his heart, he's Conservative. And in his head he's Conservative.

But I don't fully believe you. You're a clever and thoughtful and most importantly self-aware individual, as this discussion shows. So I don't believe you'd simply do what the politicians you like best told you to. I think what you've done is set out one of those 'this sentence is a lie' paradoxes which by stating you disprove. Or something.

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

MrEd said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

glw said:

Leon said:

His point about Daszak - the creepy scientist at Wuhan - successfully avoiding all questions (let alone arrest/trial etc) is bang on. The Americans can’t do much about Chinese labs and Chinese boffins, but Daszak is a US citizen, who got US funding, and he lives in the USA

He could be hauled in front of a Senate committee/courtroom tomorrow. Yet they don’t do it

Which strongly suggests plenty of important people in the USA are worried as F about their possible guilt, and are quite content for the whole Covid-origin question to be airily waved away as “unknowable”

Which is even more reason to investigate it

Did you see this? A suspected Delta lab-leak from a BSL3 laboratory in Taiwan.

https://fortune.com/2021/12/10/taiwan-investigates-covid-lab-leak-scientist-tests-positive-bite-infected-mouse/

Far too many people act as though lab-leaks of dangerous viruses can't happen.

Yes indeed. Which makes the successful suppression of the lab leak hypothesis - as a “racist conspiracy” - for at least a year, all the more remarkable, and outrageous

They acted like it was an insane concept - a virus leaking from a lab! No way! - and anyone who voiced the possibility was a crackpot Trumpite

Quintessential gaslighting

I confess it worked on me, for a while. My initial assumption when the virus first emerged was Oh it must have come from the lab. The coincidence was just too much. This was, let it be noted, the initial assumption of the Chinese scientist who runs the lab - batwoman Shi - she thought “Christ what if it got out of my lab” and she rushed back from Shanghai to “check”. So it was not an absurd theory to HER

Then the Lancet letter came out and everyone denounced the hypothesis and I thought “well they must know what they’re talking about”

A couple of months later the doubts began. THAT virus in THAT city with THAT lab? Etc

The point you make is a good one. No way should that lab leak theory (lol) have been laughed at. At least nobody's laughing now but I guess you'd say that doesn't make it all alright because it should never have been laughed at in the first place. And again you'd be right.

However I'd like to add a point of my own and it's this. Time management. None of us are able to check out properly the merits of every point of view we come across about something interesting & important in the field of world events. If we tried to do so we'd be doing nothing else and still couldn't cover but a fraction.

So what do we do? We use shortcuts, one of which is to place weight (or not) on something based on who & where it's coming from. I do this, you do this, we all do this. Ok, some do more digging than others and some are less biased than others (these 2 things not necessarily being correlated, btw, since you can be lazy but not prone to bias or a dervish researcher but only look for what you want) nevertheless it's true in general that people form opinions on something based largely on other people's opinions of it.

Given the frequent necessity to take this shortcut, it's good news that there's one rule of thumb which is just incredibly efficient in terms of the time it saves and the near zero error rate it leads to for those who follow it. The rule is - Anything that come out of the mouth of an ardent Trumpite MAGA follower is complete & utter horsehit.

Seems that here - just this once - it might have let us down. But I'll be sticking with it. Life's too short not to.

The problem - as I am sure you and Leon know - is that the lab leak theory became politicised. If you believed it, you were Trump-ist and so the polite classes didn't want to go near the theory with a barge pole.

That distaste should have been put to one side and the facts investigated. And, if the horror of being associated with a "Trumpy" view was too much, then at least tell yourself even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, fair point from you there. Is it a leap year?

The 'Authorities" shouldn't be letting politics skew how they treat something like that. I was more talking about how 'ordinary' people make their minds up on issues in the general flow of things. Who is saying what is important there, very important.

Eg, if you switched the people backing Remain and Leave, I'd have voted Leave. No need to spin any wheels on it. Leave.

Really?

I was on the leave side, but never had much time for most of the politicians on the leave side, Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey aside. (Though I also lost a lot of respect for some of the Remainier politicians whose campaign was so utterly brainless and full of holes it my me want to weep. Not that I am saying the leave campaign was a picture of intelligent debate - but there were few politicians I respected to start with there.)
And pretty much everyone I knew in my middle class urban public sector environment was on the Remain side.
If you'd swapped all the people around, I'd have been entirely comfortable with Leave (unless - and there is this possibility - I am by nature just a massive contrarian.)
Leave was very much a head-over-heart for me.

Blokes almost ALWAYS claim it's 'head over heart' on political stuff.

But, yes, I'm serious. If the sort of politicians and public figures generally who were supporting Leave and Remain were flipped, I'd have voted Leave.

HYUFD said:

Popularity of senior Tory and Labour politicians compared to name recognition

https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1479534972092436485?s=20

Leon said:

TimT said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.

I’m absolutely pro-vax. Stick that pin in me baby. But I know where my friend is coming from

If told, “you will need two new jabs every year, until you keel over” I’d feel a bit queasy. What exactly are they pumping into me? Probably irrational, but if I feel that way, others will. Like my friend (who has an anti-vax wife which drives him nuts, ironically)

MrEd said:

dixiedean said:

MrEd said:

Sandpit said:

dixiedean said:

Am I the only one thinking not so fast on B Erdington?

Do the local Labour activists think that a very low turnout March by-election works in their favour, or are they better trying to run it in May alongside the locals? Was 50%/40% last time out, with Brexit Party third.

My gut feel on this is that, unlike the last couple of by-elections, the Tories will go in hard on this one. Not too long to get from London, a Brexit seat and a reasonable candidate. If they lose, they will probably blame low turnout.

The Tories didn't go hard in NS or OB+S? I find that difficult to believe.
And if they didn't, then why the heck not?

I'll copy and paste the answer I gave to HYFUD so apologies:

Because I don't think given Boris' position he can afford to accept this is another loss, especially in a seat that is so Leave. I'm not saying the Tories will win, I am saying I think they will put up more of an effort than some recent by-elections. And it is not that far to travel to Birmingham from London, probably easier to get to than going to Old Bexley.

Pro_Rata said:

Leon said:

TimT said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

kjh said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

pigeon said:

News: JCVI recommends against commencing a second booster campaign at this time. Priority remains completing the first one, which still provides good protection for the vulnerable.

Fourth jabs recommended for the immunocompromised only for the time being.

So far there's little evidence we need a second booster so soon after the first.

A highly pro-vax friend said to me the other day ‘I don’t want another fucking jab’

People are resistant and don’t want to be pin-cushions for the rest of time. This might become an issue, and maybe HMG is taking this into account

There is no resistance to the annual flu jab.

That made me wonder about seasonal flu vaccine uptake numbers. Prior to COVID, it was around 70-80% uptake for flu jabs. Apparently that has gone up to 91% in the wake of COVID.

It does not seem as though the population at large is resistant to yet more, regular jabs.

I’m absolutely pro-vax. Stick that pin in me baby. But I know where my friend is coming from

If told, “you will need two new jabs every year, until you keel over” I’d feel a bit queasy. What exactly are they pumping into me? Probably irrational, but if I feel that way, others will. Like my friend (who has an anti-vax wife which drives him nuts, ironically)

Omicron is milder, if not yet mild, and the evolutionary run of play isn't going to reverse the upper respiratory, fast breeder reasons why Omicron is mild. Multiple vaccinations, having it a few times, immunity will ultimately render this a common cold for sure. We'll see what COVID is doing to people in a year or two but, yes, I've already mused on here as to when I want to find the vaccination off ramp and nothing has changed.

I'm not getting repeated lifelong vaccination for a common cold, that's for sure.