"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
It is pretty galling. These reports are meant to be a sort of tool kit for those in a distant future to deal with a similar situation. How will this one help?
That's not realistic. It was about closure and moving on.
I think it is realistic. The 1967 (date could be wrong) Foot and Mouth Disease report contained all the information that Blair's Government would have needed to contain the later outbreak successfully. No pyres for example. That the idiots were either unaware of or chose to ignore the report is not the fault of its authors.
But that was so much less complex. You could get your arms around Foot and Mouth.
Also - f&m was not new the second (or more like 20th) time round. Covid-19 was completely new*. At least part of the issue with it is how to handle a pandemic of something that is new, and doesn't behave like other diseases in significant ways (e.g. infectiousness before symptoms appear, if they indeed do).
*Edit: apart from being from a known virus family, of course, the SARS covids.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
It is pretty galling. These reports are meant to be a sort of tool kit for those in a distant future to deal with a similar situation. How will this one help?
With the very specific recommendations it makes about planning for events, how "reasonable worst case scenarios" are presented, have scientific advice was sought, how devolution functions, what role the PM should take etc. etc.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There will be others.
As an example a fear from those living comfortable, even affluent, lives outside London who wouldn't be able to do so if they lived in London.
London's unaffordable housing, inequalities, congestion being among the factors of this.
These people might think of London as "a nice place for a visit but I wouldn't want to live there" and so distrust government ideas suggesting the rest of the country becomes more like London.
I sense that's (literally) you talking. So I'll accept the point. Rude not to.
Me as well. I detest living in cities and living in London would be a living nightmare for me. Love visiting but don't want to lay my head down anywhere insde the M25 more than 1 night in a row.
The idea of 'the rest of the country becoming more like London' would be hell on earth for me.
Its one reason why I feel an immediate suspicion of suggestions about '15 minute cities'.
Maybe irrationally, maybe not.
Most rural villages are 5-minute "cities", by necessity. Indeed the closure of so many rural schools, bus stops, GPs, shops, pubs is not something to celebrate imo.
The good old days when you had a choice of one shop, one pub and one school.
I suppose you got the choice of being a farm hand at more than one farm.
Personally I prefer the opportunities a car brings for work, retail, leisure and public services.
I think most people in rural areas like having local services tbh.
They like the idea of local services and they like the availability of local services.
But are they willing to pay, either directly or through taxation, for those local services ?
Which is why so many village shops and pubs have closed.
Which is a shame.
But the fervent desire for services to be far away must be the weirdest and most surprising outcomes from the Facebook-group conspiracy milieu.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
'Most Green, Labour and Lib Dem voters see the England flag as a racist symbol. Only a minority from any party say the same of the UK flag, although Greens are still split
A symbol being used by racists for racist purposes is sadly going to be seen as racist. It's a real shame. I certainly won't be rushing to put it up during the world cup. Great work, racists! You've shat on your own country's flag.
That's how I feel - I won't now fly the England flag because it's racist. It shouldn't be, I wish it wasn't, but it is now. However, as someone with mixed British heritage I always preferred the Union Jack anyway.
I bet you regularly flew the English flag before. All the time. 24/7.
'Most Green, Labour and Lib Dem voters see the England flag as a racist symbol. Only a minority from any party say the same of the UK flag, although Greens are still split
A symbol being used by racists for racist purposes is sadly going to be seen as racist. It's a real shame. I certainly won't be rushing to put it up during the world cup. Great work, racists! You've shat on your own country's flag.
On the other hand, they might think that people they don't really consider to be English not wanting anything to do with the English flag makes their point for them. I doubt English racists would be at all bothered if they were the only ones that loved their flag
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
"thorough report"?
Have you read it? You don't give any sign of having done so.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
I've never met anyone professionally C of E who wasn't a raging far lefty. And bishops are the worst of them. It's not actually their politics that grates. I have friends if the far left. But my far left friends don't tend to hold that their views hold any sort of extra weight because of their jobs. I fucking hate bishops
The guy who founded Christianity was a raging far lefty. Makes sense that his followers would be.
He got chopped for it, too.
And his true followers are a PITA. Just look at the Quakers. Annoying social consciences, pointing out uncomfortable truths. Great folk.
As for Cookie's remarks on the bishs being in the HoL, just try evicting them from the HoL, and see which political parties object most. (Plus there have been plenty of raging rightie bishs and for all I know still are.)
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
"thorough report"?
Have you read it? You don't give any sign of having done so.
Parts of it. I will look at the rest this weekend.
I am talking about statements like "modelling has established" which are in the bits I have read.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
Anything other than "lockdown was unnecessary and done under false pretences" was never going to satisfy people who said at the time that lockdown was unnecessary and being done under false pretences. It was an opinion held irrationally but very passionately, I recall. I think because the eerie frightening circumstances fostered that sort of reaction.
Where are the voices of Hollywood? Usually so quick to advertise their virtue and jump on any bandwagon to show they are on the side of the angels. Why aren’t former presidents, chiefs of defence staff, too generals hitting the news channels to say that this is a disgraceful proposal?
They need to remember that the one Hollywood star on Putin’s team is Stevan Segal, he’s a piece of shit, don’t be a Steven Segal.
There's at least one GOP Rep (and former USAF general) who is not happy:
We don't have all the details yet, but it's sounding more like a Russian plan for Ukraine. Negotiating without Ukraine is a lot like Munich 1938. It makes Ukraine weaker & vulnerable to future Russian attacks. It's unacceptable & a surrender to Putin. We must have moral clarity.
I've never met anyone professionally C of E who wasn't a raging far lefty. And bishops are the worst of them. It's not actually their politics that grates. I have friends if the far left. But my far left friends don't tend to hold that their views hold any sort of extra weight because of their jobs. I fucking hate bishops
The guy who founded Christianity was a raging far lefty. Makes sense that his followers would be.
He got chopped for it, too.
And his true followers are a PITA. Just look at the Quakers. Annoying social consciences, pointing out uncomfortable truths. Great folk.
As for Cookie's remarks on the bishs being in the HoL, just try evicting them from the HoL, and see which political parties object most. (Plus there have been plenty of raging rightie bishs and for all I know still are.)
It was Starmer who kept the Bishops in the Lords after they backed Labour in opposing the Tories Rwanda Bill, even as he removed the remaining mainly Tory hereditary peers.
Most Tory MPs and peers voted to keep the Bishops in the Lords but only narrowly and not as many as voted to keep the hereditary peers. The LDs, Greens and Farage voted for an elected upper house
I had a bit of a fuck-it moment. Went to a bookshop, bought all four books in the "Sprawl" trilogy. New prints and all the covers match. Am flicking thru "Burning Chrome" and the memories are intense: fuck your madeleines, Swann 😀
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Not nice, Cookie.
Whereas his comments to me are always perfectly pleasant and I just need to smile and take it !
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
I've never met anyone professionally C of E who wasn't a raging far lefty. And bishops are the worst of them. It's not actually their politics that grates. I have friends if the far left. But my far left friends don't tend to hold that their views hold any sort of extra weight because of their jobs. I fucking hate bishops
The guy who founded Christianity was a raging far lefty. Makes sense that his followers would be.
He got chopped for it, too.
And his true followers are a PITA. Just look at the Quakers. Annoying social consciences, pointing out uncomfortable truths. Great folk.
As for Cookie's remarks on the bishs being in the HoL, just try evicting them from the HoL, and see which political parties object most. (Plus there have been plenty of raging rightie bishs and for all I know still are.)
It was Starmer who kept the Bishops in the Lords after they backed Labour in opposing the Tories Rwanda Bill, even as he removed the remaining mainly Tory hereditary peers.
Most Tory MPs and peers voted to keep the Bishops in the Lords but only narrowly and not as many as voted to keep the hereditary peers. The LDs, Greens and Farage voted for an elected upper house
Word on the street is that Starmer was responsible for the Black Death and food in buckets.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There will be others.
As an example a fear from those living comfortable, even affluent, lives outside London who wouldn't be able to do so if they lived in London.
London's unaffordable housing, inequalities, congestion being among the factors of this.
These people might think of London as "a nice place for a visit but I wouldn't want to live there" and so distrust government ideas suggesting the rest of the country becomes more like London.
I sense that's (literally) you talking. So I'll accept the point. Rude not to.
Me as well. I detest living in cities and living in London would be a living nightmare for me. Love visiting but don't want to lay my head down anywhere insde the M25 more than 1 night in a row.
The idea of 'the rest of the country becoming more like London' would be hell on earth for me.
Its one reason why I feel an immediate suspicion of suggestions about '15 minute cities'.
Maybe irrationally, maybe not.
Most rural villages are 5-minute "cities", by necessity. Indeed the closure of so many rural schools, bus stops, GPs, shops, pubs is not something to celebrate imo.
The good old days when you had a choice of one shop, one pub and one school.
I suppose you got the choice of being a farm hand at more than one farm.
Personally I prefer the opportunities a car brings for work, retail, leisure and public services.
I think most people in rural areas like having local services tbh.
They like the idea of local services and they like the availability of local services.
But are they willing to pay, either directly or through taxation, for those local services ?
Which is why so many village shops and pubs have closed.
Indeed, in our small village we no longer have a pub, primary school or shop though we still have a church with once a month services and village hall but that is it.
Our nearest bigger villages still have 2 pubs each and a primary school each but no shop either, online deliveries in particular have killed the traditional village shop
I've never met anyone professionally C of E who wasn't a raging far lefty. And bishops are the worst of them. It's not actually their politics that grates. I have friends if the far left. But my far left friends don't tend to hold that their views hold any sort of extra weight because of their jobs. I fucking hate bishops
Yes, I find a Knight generally more useful in the end game.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
But not so angry that you can be bothered to read the report? Their model clearly did not become "total gospel across Whitehall", as the report describes. As for whether it was "just deaths postponed":
4.225. It is wholly understandable that any government leader should wrestle with the profound decision as to whether to order a nationwide lockdown. Given the damaging societal, economic and educational consequences [...] enforcing a mandatory lockdown should be a measure of last resort. All viable measures short of a lockdown should be tried first and implemented early enough to allow time to analyse their effectiveness before a lockdown is imposed.
4.226. Had the many steps short of a mandatory lockdown been taken earlier in the pandemic, a mandatory UK-wide lockdown might not have become necessary or it might have been possible to reduce its length. To that extent, all four governments can be rightly criticised.
4.227. However, the Inquiry rejects the criticism that the four governments were wrong – in principle – to impose a lockdown. Indeed, the Inquiry accepts the consensus of the evidence before it that a mandatory lockdown should have been imposed one week earlier.
4.228. The UK government and devolved administrations had received clear and compelling advice by this time that the exponential growth in transmission, in the absence of a mandatory lockdown, would be likely to lead to loss of life on a scale that was reasonably to be regarded as unconscionable and unacceptable. No government, acting in accordance with its overarching duty to preserve life, could ignore such advice or tolerate the number of deaths envisaged. The governments’ laudable aim was therefore to minimise the numbers of deaths, particularly among the elderly and vulnerable, and to prevent the healthcare systems across the UK from collapsing at all costs. In this, they acted in common with many other countries.
4.229. It cannot be known whether – through their undoubted ability to expand at speed (including through the cancellation of elective care, the discharge of patients and the construction of Nightingale hospitals) and the incredible resourcefulness and commitment of their staff – the health services across the UK would have collapsed if there had been no lockdown. However, there was a serious risk, which the governments were reasonably entitled not to run, that exponential growth would lead to hospital cases of such a magnitude that, if the growth were not radically reduced, the point would inevitably be reached at which no health service would survive. At that point, the loss of life would be exacerbated by the collapse of the health system [...]
4.230. No reasonable government could effectively gamble the lives of its citizens on its own assessment that the restrictions of 16, 18 and 20 March 2020 might, of themselves, be enough. There was no time to wait.
4.231. Through their own acts and omissions, the four governments had made lockdown inevitable.
You surely don't say that the Telegraph might give a less than accurate impression of the report ? That might make me furious, too.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
What further proof do we have of Trump being a Russian asset than Trump siding virtually 100% with Putin ever since his second term started?
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Not nice, Cookie.
Whereas his comments to me are always perfectly pleasant and I just need to smile and take it !
Note: the subject Taz responds to the stimulus as predicted!
'Most Green, Labour and Lib Dem voters see the England flag as a racist symbol. Only a minority from any party say the same of the UK flag, although Greens are still split
A symbol being used by racists for racist purposes is sadly going to be seen as racist. It's a real shame. I certainly won't be rushing to put it up during the world cup. Great work, racists! You've shat on your own country's flag.
On the other hand, they might think that people they don't really consider to be English not wanting anything to do with the English flag makes their point for them. I doubt English racists would be at all bothered if they were the only ones that loved their flag
Yes. It's just going to confirm to them their belief that Lefties are self-hating traitors.
What would be interesting would be how they would react to Muslims embracing the St George's cross.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
That's what happens when you have legal inquiries led by judges, though. They do not understand mathematical or economic questions, and are not interested in them. What they care about is process. Understandably, since in legal matters incompetence is not usually criminal, as long as you follow correct procedure.
So we'll learn all the wrong lessons from the inquiry, and the next time will make the same mistakes, except worse. And in the meantime we will have wasted hundreds of millions and several years on this pointless jamboree, which will only have enriched lawyers and other parasites.
You're not the only one who is angry about this.
No, this is what happens when a bunch of people online who want certain answers to be true, with no regard for the evidence, don't like it when a thorough report disagrees with them.
Anything other than "lockdown was unnecessary and done under false pretences" was never going to satisfy people who said at the time that lockdown was unnecessary and being done under false pretences. It was an opinion held irrationally but very passionately, I recall. I think because the eerie frightening circumstances fostered that sort of reaction.
Yes and I think a lot of how we responded (via 'lockdowns', a previously unheard of term) was influenced by the initial Chinese response, which was predictably authoritarian.
But I have sympathy with policymakers who came to different conclusions. And looking back, there was no single clearly 'correct' response other than the acceleration of vaccine research. Big decisions had to be made based on fairly poor data on the virus.
Compared to the many public policy failures we see happen where it's a slow motion car crash over many years, I'd say the Covid response (both the positive and the failures) were understandable under the circumstances.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
Oh, the stresses of political betting!
The Labour Party doesn't work like that. The deputy leader runs the election for the successor, there's no automatic succession
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There will be others.
As an example a fear from those living comfortable, even affluent, lives outside London who wouldn't be able to do so if they lived in London.
London's unaffordable housing, inequalities, congestion being among the factors of this.
These people might think of London as "a nice place for a visit but I wouldn't want to live there" and so distrust government ideas suggesting the rest of the country becomes more like London.
I sense that's (literally) you talking. So I'll accept the point. Rude not to.
Me as well. I detest living in cities and living in London would be a living nightmare for me. Love visiting but don't want to lay my head down anywhere insde the M25 more than 1 night in a row.
The idea of 'the rest of the country becoming more like London' would be hell on earth for me.
Its one reason why I feel an immediate suspicion of suggestions about '15 minute cities'.
Maybe irrationally, maybe not.
Most rural villages are 5-minute "cities", by necessity. Indeed the closure of so many rural schools, bus stops, GPs, shops, pubs is not something to celebrate imo.
The good old days when you had a choice of one shop, one pub and one school.
I suppose you got the choice of being a farm hand at more than one farm.
Personally I prefer the opportunities a car brings for work, retail, leisure and public services.
I think most people in rural areas like having local services tbh.
They like the idea of local services and they like the availability of local services.
But are they willing to pay, either directly or through taxation, for those local services ?
Which is why so many village shops and pubs have closed.
Indeed, in our small village we no longer have a pub, primary school or shop though we still have a church with once a month services and village hall but that is it.
Our nearest bigger villages still have 2 pubs each and a primary school each but no shop either, online deliveries in particular have killed the traditional village shop
We have the traditional church next to the pub. The shop is the local garage, but is currently shut being refurbished and turned to a Morrisons Daily. We also have a primary school. The village population is around 1200, so bigger than many.
'Most Green, Labour and Lib Dem voters see the England flag as a racist symbol. Only a minority from any party say the same of the UK flag, although Greens are still split
A symbol being used by racists for racist purposes is sadly going to be seen as racist. It's a real shame. I certainly won't be rushing to put it up during the world cup. Great work, racists! You've shat on your own country's flag.
On the other hand, they might think that people they don't really consider to be English not wanting anything to do with the English flag makes their point for them. I doubt English racists would be at all bothered if they were the only ones that loved their flag
Yes. It's just going to confirm to them their belief that Lefties are self-hating traitors.
What would be interesting would be how they would react to Muslims embracing the St George's cross.
St George was a Palestinian/Syrian/Turk after all!
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
'Most Green, Labour and Lib Dem voters see the England flag as a racist symbol. Only a minority from any party say the same of the UK flag, although Greens are still split
A symbol being used by racists for racist purposes is sadly going to be seen as racist. It's a real shame. I certainly won't be rushing to put it up during the world cup. Great work, racists! You've shat on your own country's flag.
On the other hand, they might think that people they don't really consider to be English not wanting anything to do with the English flag makes their point for them. I doubt English racists would be at all bothered if they were the only ones that loved their flag
Yes. It's just going to confirm to them their belief that Lefties are self-hating traitors.
What would be interesting would be how they would react to Muslims embracing the St George's cross.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Not nice, Cookie.
Whereas his comments to me are always perfectly pleasant and I just need to smile and take it !
Note: the subject Taz responds to the stimulus as predicted!
I doubt a stimulus is anything you’ve ever experienced. You may need to google it. Human interaction is a wonderful thing.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
Is that necessarily correct?
Imagine a virus that ends up proving itself resistant to all vaccine attempts. It's a decade or more before a vaccine is available.
Is early lockdown the right response? Keep the virus spread low until a vaccine arrives a decade later?
I'd argue in such a case were better off keeping contact at manageable levels so hospitals aren't overwhelmed and vulnerable people kept isolated until it becomes a common virus like today.
There's a big risk of people fighting the last war in future pandemics.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
Oh, the stresses of political betting!
The Labour Party doesn't work like that. The deputy leader runs the election for the successor, there's no automatic succession
(To be clear I'm not hoping anyone falls under a bus) Supposing Starmer did fall under a bus. who would be Labour leader? And who would KC3 summon to the palace? I presume it's Powell. And if that's right and she's PM are Labour really going to change it?
It might be Lammy too. (And I think that would be the right choice for the King - slightly avoiding politics)
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There will be others.
As an example a fear from those living comfortable, even affluent, lives outside London who wouldn't be able to do so if they lived in London.
London's unaffordable housing, inequalities, congestion being among the factors of this.
These people might think of London as "a nice place for a visit but I wouldn't want to live there" and so distrust government ideas suggesting the rest of the country becomes more like London.
I sense that's (literally) you talking. So I'll accept the point. Rude not to.
Me as well. I detest living in cities and living in London would be a living nightmare for me. Love visiting but don't want to lay my head down anywhere insde the M25 more than 1 night in a row.
The idea of 'the rest of the country becoming more like London' would be hell on earth for me.
Its one reason why I feel an immediate suspicion of suggestions about '15 minute cities'.
Maybe irrationally, maybe not.
Most rural villages are 5-minute "cities", by necessity. Indeed the closure of so many rural schools, bus stops, GPs, shops, pubs is not something to celebrate imo.
The good old days when you had a choice of one shop, one pub and one school.
I suppose you got the choice of being a farm hand at more than one farm.
Personally I prefer the opportunities a car brings for work, retail, leisure and public services.
I think most people in rural areas like having local services tbh.
They like the idea of local services and they like the availability of local services.
But are they willing to pay, either directly or through taxation, for those local services ?
Which is why so many village shops and pubs have closed.
Which is a shame.
But the fervent desire for services to be far away must be the weirdest and most surprising outcomes from the Facebook-group conspiracy milieu.
I don't know how many people want things to be further away, I certainly don't, but what they do want is a choice.
And once you start travelling away from your locality for purpose X the 'sunk cost' of so doing makes it easy to do so for purposes Y and Z.
As an example I will imminently be driving to my health club, on my return I will call in at the supermarket.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Not nice, Cookie.
Whereas his comments to me are always perfectly pleasant and I just need to smile and take it !
Note: the subject Taz responds to the stimulus as predicted!
I doubt a stimulus is anything you’ve ever experienced. You many need to google it.
Note: the subject Taz continues to respond to the stimulus as predicted!
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
What further proof do we have of Trump being a Russian asset than Trump siding virtually 100% with Putin ever since his second term started?
That Trump is an asset to Russia is surely beyond doubt.
The only question is whether he's on the Kremlin payroll, or doing it as a hobby.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
Is that necessarily correct?
Imagine a virus that ends up proving itself resistant to all vaccine attempts. It's a decade or more before a vaccine is available.
Is early lockdown the right response? Keep the virus spread low until a vaccine arrives a decade later?
I'd argue in such a case were better off keeping contact at manageable levels so hospitals aren't overwhelmed and vulnerable people kept isolated until it becomes a common virus like today.
There's a big risk of people fighting the last war in future pandemics.
OK, sure. And what will be a manageable level so hospitals aren't overwhelmed will depend on the disease. With COVID-19, as the report describes -- but as some here will never accept -- the data was flooding in that hospitals would be overwhelmed, very soon.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
Why should anyone feel Christmassy when it's over a month away? It's not even Advent yet FFS.
I have a deep mistrust of anyone who blithely buys into the vacuous Commercialism of front-loading the Festive season.
Can't we start on Christmas Eve, but maintain it through until Candlemas?!?
We had this discussion last year. and probably the year before. The answer to your question is Yes. It's exactly what I do, as far as humanly possible, which being practical is from the Sunday before Christmas, which this year is 21 December. (I have to turn up to one or two school things before that).
But the best thing is keeping it till Candlemas - 40 days - in which diaries are fairly empty and you can do Christmas stuff at a slower pace and people are not frenetic. Push 'Dry January' to Lent, and make January special. By the end of it there are crocuses if we are lucky.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
Is that necessarily correct?
Imagine a virus that ends up proving itself resistant to all vaccine attempts. It's a decade or more before a vaccine is available.
Is early lockdown the right response? Keep the virus spread low until a vaccine arrives a decade later?
I'd argue in such a case were better off keeping contact at manageable levels so hospitals aren't overwhelmed and vulnerable people kept isolated until it becomes a common virus like today.
There's a big risk of people fighting the last war in future pandemics.
Depends on the combination of replication rate and mortality rate I think. COVID 19 was devastating because both those numbers were relatively high. Hence the "if you are going to do it at all, you need to do it early" in my comment where the COVID-19 virus made significant NMIs inevitable.
If you go early you may tolerate a replication rate above 1, ie a less severe form of lockdown. If you go late you have less room for manoeuvre.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Correction: The United States wants Russia’s answer on an unconditional withdrawal of Ukraine by Thursday.
This Russian-drafted propaganda must be rejected and disregarded for the unserious nonsense that it is. This moment requires Peace Through Strength, not appeasement.
Today, we have officially notified both the Clerk of the House and House leadership of our discharge petition to force a vote on crushing Russian sanctions immediately upon our return.
The European response to this, broadly across Ukraine, the UK and relevant EU states, is hopefully well practised now:
1) Don't contradict Trump too strongly publicly.
2) Privately insist on reasonable sounding changes to the otherwise excellent plan, knowing Russia will reject them.
3) See Trump get annoyed at Russia for not accepting the revised plan.
My fear is point 2 fails and Trump doesn't accept the changes, knowing Putin will reject them. In which case we need to call his bluff and soldier on without that US. Trump won't like being irrelevant so will end up trying to salvage another deal in the future.
It's probably what will happen, but I read an opinion (Well, two) over on another forum that simply advocated for direct intervention by the EU/UK, arguing that this was now pretty much inevitable anyway.
Unless Trump pulls a TACO, or the above 3 point plan works; I'm struggling to see how this current Trump plan if implemented, doesn't lead to a rump Czechoslovakia collapsing inside of six months with Germany sweeping in to take the rest before turning on another neighbouring country like Poland....... oh wait......
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
What further proof do we have of Trump being a Russian asset than Trump siding virtually 100% with Putin ever since his second term started?
Anyone that supports Trump is supporting Putin and is undermining Ukraine.
Why should anyone feel Christmassy when it's over a month away? It's not even Advent yet FFS.
I have a deep mistrust of anyone who blithely buys into the vacuous Commercialism of front-loading the Festive season.
Can't we start on Christmas Eve, but maintain it through until Candlemas?!?
We had this discussion last year. and probably the year before. The answer to your question is Yes. It's exactly what I do, as far as humanly possible, which being practical is from the Sunday before Christmas, which this year is 21 December. (I have to turn up to one or two school things before that).
But the best thing is keeping it till Candlemas - 40 days - in which diaries are fairly empty and you can do Christmas stuff at a slower pace and people are not frenetic. Push 'Dry January' to Lent, and make January special. By the end of it there are crocuses if we are lucky.
The olden people knew what they were doing.
November and December are really very late autumn; we don't need distraction. The worst bit of winter, January and early February, is when we need something nice. Then, by the time Lent kicks in, there are the first hints of spring, if we are quiet enough to look.
(Though having generic pretty street lights throughout GMT feels like the right thing to do.)
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Thanks for showing that you don't understand exponential growth. Don't worry, most people don't.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
It’s always best to laugh off anything on this site if you think someone is having a go - it’s part of the to and fro and all fine. Nothing is ever really personal as we are frankly largely anonymous and unlikely to meet in person but if we do then it will be perfectly civilised.
You yourself used to get upset by a former poster having a go at you - to you it was unpleasant - and so should probably extend the same consideration to Sunil.
I can’t think of any time I’ve felt offended by someone’s posts at me as it’s an internet site, not down the pub after 15 pints. Enjoy the cut and thirst, silliness and general rumbunctiousness.
* I might have a different view if I’m pissed later.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
I don’t think I did but, either way, back off Sunil
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
That’s how exponential growth works.
Exponential growth and fixed resources. once those fixed resources are overwhelmed things get interesting quickly..
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Thanks for showing that you don't understand exponential growth. Don't worry, most people don't.
On this site, that gets you banned for twice as long as your previous ban.
176 days of the future to look forward to, already.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
What further proof do we have of Trump being a Russian asset than Trump siding virtually 100% with Putin ever since his second term started?
If we ask the hypothetical question "What would Trump do differently if he was a Russian "useful idiot"?", the answer is "nothing at all"
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
I don’t think I did but, either way, back off Sunil
Or else what ? Who appointed you his knight in shining armour ?
If he doesn’t bother me or abuse me there’s no problem.
Why should anyone feel Christmassy when it's over a month away? It's not even Advent yet FFS.
I have a deep mistrust of anyone who blithely buys into the vacuous Commercialism of front-loading the Festive season.
Can't we start on Christmas Eve, but maintain it through until Candlemas?!?
We had this discussion last year. and probably the year before. The answer to your question is Yes. It's exactly what I do, as far as humanly possible, which being practical is from the Sunday before Christmas, which this year is 21 December. (I have to turn up to one or two school things before that).
But the best thing is keeping it till Candlemas - 40 days - in which diaries are fairly empty and you can do Christmas stuff at a slower pace and people are not frenetic. Push 'Dry January' to Lent, and make January special. By the end of it there are crocuses if we are lucky.
I generally get fed up with Christmas starting too early, but some stuff has to get done, for example the pudding. I will be making it this week which is about the right time in advance to do it.
Why should anyone feel Christmassy when it's over a month away? It's not even Advent yet FFS.
I have a deep mistrust of anyone who blithely buys into the vacuous Commercialism of front-loading the Festive season.
Can't we start on Christmas Eve, but maintain it through until Candlemas?!?
We had this discussion last year. and probably the year before. The answer to your question is Yes. It's exactly what I do, as far as humanly possible, which being practical is from the Sunday before Christmas, which this year is 21 December. (I have to turn up to one or two school things before that).
But the best thing is keeping it till Candlemas - 40 days - in which diaries are fairly empty and you can do Christmas stuff at a slower pace and people are not frenetic. Push 'Dry January' to Lent, and make January special. By the end of it there are crocuses if we are lucky.
I generally get fed up with Christmas starting too early, but some stuff has to get done, for example the pudding. I will be making it this week which is about the right time in advance to do it.
We’ve been in Morpeth today. Lovely little town. Xmas tree out and lights out. Feels very Christmassy. It was quite nice.
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
Interesting and perhaps surprising thaht Farage has apparently come out against the Trump peace deal. Putting some distance between himself and both Trump and his former Welsh party leader?
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
Well it's not acceptable at all, but if Ukraine accepts the deal then they should get all of our support.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
I think it is important research so that future policy can be based on evidence rather than the gut feel of someone on an internet forum. The article is peer reviewed in one of the most prestigious scientific journals - I really can't argue with the numbers
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
All that fuss over a touch of flu.
So long as us top folk keep our feet in our wellies.
The European response to this, broadly across Ukraine, the UK and relevant EU states, is hopefully well practised now:
1) Don't contradict Trump too strongly publicly.
2) Privately insist on reasonable sounding changes to the otherwise excellent plan, knowing Russia will reject them.
3) See Trump get annoyed at Russia for not accepting the revised plan.
My fear is point 2 fails and Trump doesn't accept the changes, knowing Putin will reject them. In which case we need to call his bluff and soldier on without that US. Trump won't like being irrelevant so will end up trying to salvage another deal in the future.
It's probably what will happen, but I read an opinion (Well, two) over on another forum that simply advocated for direct intervention by the EU/UK, arguing that this was now pretty much inevitable anyway.
Unless Trump pulls a TACO, or the above 3 point plan works; I'm struggling to see how this current Trump plan if implemented, doesn't lead to a rump Czechoslovakia collapsing inside of six months with Germany sweeping in to take the rest before turning on another neighbouring country like Poland....... oh wait......
I'm supportive in principle of the Europe intervening directly and doing what is needed to help Ukraine win as quickly as possible, but I have my doubts as to the ability of European armies to do so.
The air forces are probably best-placed, and could make a big difference, but even there would Europeans be able to supply the ammunition, spare parts and trained personnel to sustain involvement in a major war?
In terms of infantry in the army I think psychologically we're not prepared for what fighting against a near-peer adversary would look like. The casualties would be horrendous. And there's been no visible preparation of the public, or the military, to have the option for such an engagement.
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
Well it's not acceptable at all, but if Ukraine accepts the deal then they should get all of our support.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
I don’t think I did but, either way, back off Sunil
Or else what ? Who appointed you his knight in shining armour ?
If he doesn’t bother me or abuse me there’s no problem.
If he does then fuck him, little sad Mummy’s boy.
Mummy's Boy? Moi?
But seriously, she calls me a 50 year-old man-child all the time. Make of that what you will!
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
Well it's not acceptable at all, but if Ukraine accepts the deal then they should get all of our support.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
Will Ukraine accept because it thinks its a good deal or they have no choice as their allies are flakey ?
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
When you say no one, you mean the Daily Mail and other leading such scientific journals whereas those that specialise in this stuff have been using it since 1952 and still do today for the spread of diseases.
I've never met anyone professionally C of E who wasn't a raging far lefty. And bishops are the worst of them. It's not actually their politics that grates. I have friends if the far left. But my far left friends don't tend to hold that their views hold any sort of extra weight because of their jobs. I fucking hate bishops
The guy who founded Christianity was a raging far lefty. Makes sense that his followers would be.
He got chopped for it, too.
And his true followers are a PITA. Just look at the Quakers. Annoying social consciences, pointing out uncomfortable truths. Great folk.
As for Cookie's remarks on the bishs being in the HoL, just try evicting them from the HoL, and see which political parties object most. (Plus there have been plenty of raging rightie bishs and for all I know still are.)
I would have expected it to be the left wing parties would be crossest?
You remarked earlier that bishops tend to be conservative socially - but ai have never heard a bishop be anything but enthusiastic about immigration; I have never heard a bishop talk abiut the importance of defence; I have never heard a biahop talk about law n order issues from anything like a conservative slant. I've genuinely never heard a bishop be anything but left wing.
Interesting and perhaps surprising thaht Farage has apparently come out against the Trump peace deal. Putting some distance between himself and both Trump and his former Welsh party leader?
I suspect he realises it's a weak flank of his and needs to position accordingly.
Being too closely tied to Trump (let alone Putin) could sink his chances of being PM. Our election is very likely not until 2029 and who knows how low Trump's reputation will have fallen by then given he is actively working to undermine European security.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
I don’t think I did but, either way, back off Sunil
Or else what ? Who appointed you his knight in shining armour ?
If he doesn’t bother me or abuse me there’s no problem.
If he does then fuck him, little sad Mummy’s boy.
He wasn’t abusing you. That’s the problem. He didn’t accuse you of being a Putin supporter. He accused Trump of that. The worst he did was call you a “Trump Admirer”. Is that really “abuse”?
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
Well it's not acceptable at all, but if Ukraine accepts the deal then they should get all of our support.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
Will Ukraine accept because it thinks its a good deal or they have no choice as their allies are flakey ?
They'll accept it only because they'd fear that not accepting it would lead to a worse outcome, which would indicate a pessimistic assessment of their chances if the US turns against them, and the failure of Europe to be able to support Ukraine alone.
As much as people are rightfully criticizing Trump for the surrender deal, it only has any relevance because of Europe's weakness. And so it is Europe's shame as well as America's.
Interesting and perhaps surprising thaht Farage has apparently come out against the Trump peace deal. Putting some distance between himself and both Trump and his former Welsh party leader?
Political calculation rather than principled stand . It wouldn’t be a good look for Farage to back the deal .
Putin backs the Ukraine capitulation deal... what a surprise.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
Europe needs to stand as one to say we cannot accept this. It’s rewarding aggression. It’s not acceptable.
Well it's not acceptable at all, but if Ukraine accepts the deal then they should get all of our support.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
Will Ukraine accept because it thinks its a good deal or they have no choice as their allies are flakey ?
Well I'm not sure they will. However the areas they'd concede are now a wasteland and there's a seemingly endless toll of Ukranians finishing up dead. Maybe they will. A very hard decision for Zelensky.
Europe is still the most important bit of the world. Deal done and then Europe wakes up and makes the world fantastically uncomfortable for Russia. Far less comfortable for the US too.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
Oh, the stresses of political betting!
The Labour Party doesn't work like that. The deputy leader runs the election for the successor, there's no automatic succession
(To be clear I'm not hoping anyone falls under a bus) Supposing Starmer did fall under a bus. who would be Labour leader? And who would KC3 summon to the palace? I presume it's Powell. And if that's right and she's PM are Labour really going to change it?
It might be Lammy too. (And I think that would be the right choice for the King - slightly avoiding politics)
If Starmer fell under a bus the post of PM would remain vacant until a new Labour leader was elected. Various people would carry out the functions of a PM until then. The only functions we need a PM to do is to launch the nukes and hire/fire cabinet ministers.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
Oh, the stresses of political betting!
The Labour Party doesn't work like that. The deputy leader runs the election for the successor, there's no automatic succession
(To be clear I'm not hoping anyone falls under a bus) Supposing Starmer did fall under a bus. who would be Labour leader? And who would KC3 summon to the palace? I presume it's Powell. And if that's right and she's PM are Labour really going to change it?
It might be Lammy too. (And I think that would be the right choice for the King - slightly avoiding politics)
If Starmer fell under a bus the post of PM would remain vacant until a new Labour leader was elected. Various people would carry out the functions of a PM until then. The only functions we need a PM to do is to launch the nukes and hire/fire cabinet ministers.
But who would have tea and biscuits every week with the King?
"Lord Gove questions 23,000 Covid deaths claim Former minister rejects inquiry’s conclusion that a ‘toxic culture’ blighted government during the pandemic"
It is just absolutely appalling that Ferguson's model of 23,000 saved is just repeated verbatim without any caveats as if it was some gospel truth by the inquiry conclusions.
We needed an inquiry that questioned whether that model was even remotely right or useful and an explanation of how one person or team's academic work became total gospel across Whitehall. We needed an inquiry that questioned whether even if this figure was remotely accurate and could be relied whether it was actually just deaths postponed until the second wave. So many questions about data and modelling and none of them seems to have troubled this inquiry or its Chair.
I am so angry about all this I can hardly type frankly.
This is the study you object to and referenced by the inquiry.
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
The idea that a one week difference would make a difference of 23,000 lives doesn't need any thought to be considered complete modelling pie in the sky..But let's not waste another 200 million quid..🧐💩
Rate of Spread x Mortality Rate
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Ah! The R number..such a solid scientific concept no-one refers to it anymore..😏
Are you on drugs? Is this some attempt at humour? The R number remains a basic idea taught in any epidemiology 101 course.
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
So what’s your beloved EU doing to support it ?
More than Trump.
Still not enough but at least they are not selling them down the river like the US are at the moment.
On a day that a British politician was rightfully imprisoned for taking bribes from Russia it is a shame to think that Trump will never receive a similar sentence for the same crime but on a much larger scale.
More than Trump doesn’t mean it’s adequate
This deal, it it’s as described, is diabolical and the European nations need to step up over this, peace at all costs is simply surrender
You’re usually a rational poster. What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset ?
Siding with Putin?
Who’s asking you, Mummy’s boy ?
Not you, Trump-Admiring Zealot! I was referring to Trump himself!
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
I wasn’t asking you. I was asking Richard. Has mummy called you for dinner yet ? Saddo. Go back to your basement.
Lovely. There was a poster on here who called me an objectionable bully. Can’t remember who it could possibly have been…
Me.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
You accused me of driving Isam of the site. Which is…quite the claim. Given he’s still very much on it.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Nah, I’ll give it the sad loser mummy’s boy back.
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
I don’t think I did but, either way, back off Sunil
Or else what ? Who appointed you his knight in shining armour ?
If he doesn’t bother me or abuse me there’s no problem.
If he does then fuck him, little sad Mummy’s boy.
He wasn’t abusing you. That’s the problem. He didn’t accuse you of being a Putin supporter. He accused Trump of that. The worst he did was call you a “Trump Admirer”. Is that really “abuse”?
Err, yes. Especially as I rarely comment bout Trump. Not the first time either. A pattern of behaviour. I’m sure you going into bat for PBs incel is much valued by him 😂
Comments
*Edit: apart from being from a known virus family, of course, the SARS covids.
I have a deep mistrust of anyone who blithely buys into the vacuous Commercialism of front-loading the Festive season.
Can't we start on Christmas Eve, but maintain it through until Candlemas?!?
But the fervent desire for services to be far away must be the weirdest and most surprising outcomes from the Facebook-group conspiracy milieu.
"What proof do you have Trump is a Russian asset?"
And his true followers are a PITA. Just look at the Quakers. Annoying social consciences, pointing out uncomfortable truths. Great folk.
As for Cookie's remarks on the bishs being in the HoL, just try evicting them from the HoL, and see which political parties object most. (Plus there have been plenty of raging rightie bishs and for all I know still are.)
I am talking about statements like "modelling has established" which are in the bits I have read.
This simply a sellout.
Keir Starmer says he has restored respect to UK politics since becoming PM
Most Tory MPs and peers voted to keep the Bishops in the Lords but only narrowly and not as many as voted to keep the hereditary peers. The LDs, Greens and Farage voted for an elected upper house
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.abg4262
I have no idea if the numbers stack up, whether if they had locked down a week earlier they would have saved 23,000 deaths in the first wave, rather than, say 10,000 or 40,000. I would hope the peer reviewers have the knowledge to assess the methods and data.
The principle is easy to understand however. The purpose of non medical interventions ie lockdowns is to fix the infection rate and stop it growing exponentially. If you are going to lockdown down at all - and bearing in mind the replication rate and mortality rate of COVID 29 made non medical interventions inevitable - you ALWAYS want to make them as early as you can at the lowest possible infection rate. This seems to me a very important learning for any future epidemic.
I bet nobody's ever said that before! Bettingwise I now realise that she could be Labour leader and she could be PM. I had hitherto put her in the Burnham camp (Zero chance), but I'm now a bit fearful. I presume that in the event of a random bus hitting a random toolmakers son that the deputy becomes the leader, and thus I guess PM. And I can't see Labour doing the PM kaleidoscope...
Oh, the stresses of political betting!
Our nearest bigger villages still have 2 pubs each and a primary school each but no shop either, online deliveries in particular have killed the traditional village shop
That might make me furious, too.
What would be interesting would be how they would react to Muslims embracing the St George's cross.
But I have sympathy with policymakers who came to different conclusions. And looking back, there was no single clearly 'correct' response other than the acceleration of vaccine research. Big decisions had to be made based on fairly poor data on the virus.
Compared to the many public policy failures we see happen where it's a slow motion car crash over many years, I'd say the Covid response (both the positive and the failures) were understandable under the circumstances.
Imagine a virus that ends up proving itself resistant to all vaccine attempts. It's a decade or more before a vaccine is available.
Is early lockdown the right response? Keep the virus spread low until a vaccine arrives a decade later?
I'd argue in such a case were better off keeping contact at manageable levels so hospitals aren't overwhelmed and vulnerable people kept isolated until it becomes a common virus like today.
There's a big risk of people fighting the last war in future pandemics.
It might be Lammy too. (And I think that would be the right choice for the King - slightly avoiding politics)
And once you start travelling away from your locality for purpose X the 'sunk cost' of so doing makes it easy to do so for purposes Y and Z.
As an example I will imminently be driving to my health club, on my return I will call in at the supermarket.
The only question is whether he's on the Kremlin payroll, or doing it as a hobby.
Although I’m quite cool with you these days. I never drove anyone off this site.
Do you think I should just ignore his passive aggressive shit and just laugh it off.
But the best thing is keeping it till Candlemas - 40 days - in which diaries are fairly empty and you can do Christmas stuff at a slower pace and people are not frenetic. Push 'Dry January' to Lent, and make January special. By the end of it there are crocuses if we are lucky.
If you go early you may tolerate a replication rate above 1, ie a less severe form of lockdown. If you go late you have less room for manoeuvre.
If the alternative is playground level shit like you posted then yes, you should ignore him.
Correction: The United States wants Russia’s answer on an unconditional withdrawal of Ukraine by Thursday.
This Russian-drafted propaganda must be rejected and disregarded for the unserious nonsense that it is. This moment requires Peace Through Strength, not appeasement.
Today, we have officially notified both the Clerk of the House and House leadership of our discharge petition to force a vote on crushing Russian sanctions immediately upon our return.
#PeaceThroughStrength
https://x.com/RepBrianFitz/status/1991940517584666907?s=20
Unless Trump pulls a TACO, or the above 3 point plan works; I'm struggling to see how this current Trump plan if implemented, doesn't lead to a rump Czechoslovakia collapsing inside of six months with Germany sweeping in to take the rest before turning on another neighbouring country like Poland....... oh wait......
November and December are really very late autumn; we don't need distraction. The worst bit of winter, January and early February, is when we need something nice. Then, by the time Lent kicks in, there are the first hints of spring, if we are quiet enough to look.
(Though having generic pretty street lights throughout GMT feels like the right thing to do.)
Usha Vance spotted today without her wedding ring on. 👀
https://bsky.app/profile/esqueer.net/post/3m65x2662ws2p
Turn the other cheek. No. Playground level works both ways. I’ve been posting all afternoon how I think this deal is a disgrace yet this retard thinks I’m a Trump fan 🤷♂️
You did drive Isam from the site. He returned. All cool and I think you’re now a valuable contributor here. Things change. You may want some beef with me. I have no beef with you, I enjoy your contributions these days,
https://x.com/secondtierpod/status/1991826675030778144?s=61
You yourself used to get upset by a former poster having a go at you - to you it was unpleasant - and so should probably extend the same consideration to Sunil.
I can’t think of any time I’ve felt offended by someone’s posts at me as it’s an internet site, not down the pub after 15 pints. Enjoy the cut and thirst, silliness and general rumbunctiousness.
* I might have a different view if I’m pissed later.
I was promised evil warlords when I was young. Instead we get Putin and Trump.
Can we have something of this class, please?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEECxN5P1nw
This guy got it - he even had plans to build fucktons of housing.
176 days of the future to look forward to, already.
If he doesn’t bother me or abuse me there’s no problem.
If he does then fuck him, little sad Mummy’s boy.
However I think that this magic deal suggests that the Kremlin is uncomfortable with the ongoing state of the war. They've clearly just phoned Trump and said 'present this'.
It was spreading fast, and pre-vaccine it was killing or hospitalising lots of those who caught it.
Whatever the outcome we need to ramp up the sanctions on Russia and ask all the Russian nationals in the UK to leave.
The air forces are probably best-placed, and could make a big difference, but even there would Europeans be able to supply the ammunition, spare parts and trained personnel to sustain involvement in a major war?
In terms of infantry in the army I think psychologically we're not prepared for what fighting against a near-peer adversary would look like. The casualties would be horrendous. And there's been no visible preparation of the public, or the military, to have the option for such an engagement.
But seriously, she calls me a 50 year-old man-child all the time. Make of that what you will!
You remarked earlier that bishops tend to be conservative socially - but ai have never heard a bishop be anything but enthusiastic about immigration; I have never heard a bishop talk abiut the importance of defence; I have never heard a biahop talk about law n order issues from anything like a conservative slant. I've genuinely never heard a bishop be anything but left wing.
Being too closely tied to Trump (let alone Putin) could sink his chances of being PM. Our election is very likely not until 2029 and who knows how low Trump's reputation will have fallen by then given he is actively working to undermine European security.
As much as people are rightfully criticizing Trump for the surrender deal, it only has any relevance because of Europe's weakness. And so it is Europe's shame as well as America's.
Europe is still the most important bit of the world. Deal done and then Europe wakes up and makes the world fantastically uncomfortable for Russia. Far less comfortable for the US too.
The EU and UKs desperate attempts to soothe Trumps ego has backfired .