Zhivago wrote:I think we have to wake up to the fact that we aren't going to eradicate this thing. Every year the vulnerable will need to be vaccinated against the latest strain, similarly to how they were against the most prevalent flu variants previously (Without comparing the virus and its effects directly with flu).
Also, I am not surprised that they are opening up - around 19th July schools will shut for summer holidays and therefore transmission among children should decrease. I assume they're planning some form of booster jab (either specific to latest variant or otherwise) for the autumn.
Link clearly broken indeed
The issue isn’t so much that the government is easing some restrictions, it’s mor that the whole lot are going out the window in one swoop. By all means reduce social distancing but keep masks or look at schools as a stand-alone case.
This feels less about the science and more about politics.
I’d also suggest that protecting the vulnerable whilst letting the rest of us crack on is a fallacy.
It does rather feel like the footage of Hancock was released because he didn't want to lift all the restrictions in one go, and the support from No.10 was so Boris could claim it wasn't him ushering Hancock to the top of the cliff and inviting him to jump. You can be in cabinet only for as long as you wholly support Boris (and of course Brexit)
In separate news I think my cousin who got Covid after 2 jabs continues to recover, but I now have another family member who's also just tested positive for Covid having had their 2nd jab a good number of weeks back, looks an infectious little beast, only a positive lateral flow test so far, but they have suggestive symptoms too. Entirely separate cases as they've not seen each other since before the pandemic and live well over a hundred miles apart.
Digby wrote:It does rather feel like the footage of Hancock was released because he didn't want to lift all the restrictions in one go, and the support from No.10 was so Boris could claim it wasn't him ushering Hancock to the top of the cliff and inviting him to jump. You can be in cabinet only for as long as you wholly support Boris (and of course Brexit)
In separate news I think my cousin who got Covid after 2 jabs continues to recover, but I now have another family member who's also just tested positive for Covid having had their 2nd jab a good number of weeks back, looks an infectious little beast, only a positive lateral flow test so far, but they have suggestive symptoms too. Entirely separate cases as they've not seen each other since before the pandemic and live well over a hundred miles apart.
Or Boris didn't want Hancock becoming the face and voice behind "Freedom Day" and possibly gaining a popularity as the Health Minister who did the vaccines and saw us through COVID. Bring in a new face who doesn't have time to establish himself and claim responsibility for "Freedom Day" himself.
Digby wrote:It does rather feel like the footage of Hancock was released because he didn't want to lift all the restrictions in one go, and the support from No.10 was so Boris could claim it wasn't him ushering Hancock to the top of the cliff and inviting him to jump. You can be in cabinet only for as long as you wholly support Boris (and of course Brexit)
In separate news I think my cousin who got Covid after 2 jabs continues to recover, but I now have another family member who's also just tested positive for Covid having had their 2nd jab a good number of weeks back, looks an infectious little beast, only a positive lateral flow test so far, but they have suggestive symptoms too. Entirely separate cases as they've not seen each other since before the pandemic and live well over a hundred miles apart.
Very coincidental timing. The ‘easiest investigation in history’ seems to be taking longer than suggested which makes me wonder who asked for the imagery.
Digby wrote:It does rather feel like the footage of Hancock was released because he didn't want to lift all the restrictions in one go, and the support from No.10 was so Boris could claim it wasn't him ushering Hancock to the top of the cliff and inviting him to jump. You can be in cabinet only for as long as you wholly support Boris (and of course Brexit)
In separate news I think my cousin who got Covid after 2 jabs continues to recover, but I now have another family member who's also just tested positive for Covid having had their 2nd jab a good number of weeks back, looks an infectious little beast, only a positive lateral flow test so far, but they have suggestive symptoms too. Entirely separate cases as they've not seen each other since before the pandemic and live well over a hundred miles apart.
Or Boris didn't want Hancock becoming the face and voice behind "Freedom Day" and possibly gaining a popularity as the Health Minister who did the vaccines and saw us through COVID. Bring in a new face who doesn't have time to establish himself and claim responsibility for "Freedom Day" himself.
Puja
Dangerous risk as Javid is very ambitious and will become popular as the face of freedom.
Digby wrote:It does rather feel like the footage of Hancock was released because he didn't want to lift all the restrictions in one go, and the support from No.10 was so Boris could claim it wasn't him ushering Hancock to the top of the cliff and inviting him to jump. You can be in cabinet only for as long as you wholly support Boris (and of course Brexit)
In separate news I think my cousin who got Covid after 2 jabs continues to recover, but I now have another family member who's also just tested positive for Covid having had their 2nd jab a good number of weeks back, looks an infectious little beast, only a positive lateral flow test so far, but they have suggestive symptoms too. Entirely separate cases as they've not seen each other since before the pandemic and live well over a hundred miles apart.
Or Boris didn't want Hancock becoming the face and voice behind "Freedom Day" and possibly gaining a popularity as the Health Minister who did the vaccines and saw us through COVID. Bring in a new face who doesn't have time to establish himself and claim responsibility for "Freedom Day" himself.
Puja
Dangerous risk as Javid is very ambitious and will become popular as the face of freedom.
Is he the face of freedom though? I don't know he had his feet under the desk long enough for people to associate him with it. To a lot of people (no doubt aided by the Johnson propaganda arm that stitched up Hancock), Hancock was the bad man who made things bad, then Johnson fired him for being bad and swiftly removed all the restrictions and gave us our freedoms back. Javid will no doubt be given the limelight when it's time to bring the next lockdown in though.
Agreed that it's a risk to put Javid in a position of power. He's certainly taken that job with an ambition to be the sensible and experienced adult who can take over when the press inevitably turn on Boris and devour him.
If Javid gains popularity with the pro Brexit voters they'll have to get over some issues that go with identifying as white and English or white and Welsh. That section of the populace who might have voted for Javid who're fiscally conservative and more socially liberal don't exactly love what's happened to the Tory party, and Javid is a big driver of the loons
Digby wrote:If Javid gains popularity with the pro Brexit voters they'll have to get over some issues that go with identifying as white and English or white and Welsh. That section of the populace who might have voted for Javid who're fiscally conservative and more socially liberal don't exactly love what's happened to the Tory party, and Javid is a big driver of the loons
I don't actually know that his skin colour will be that big of an issue if he can get the support of one of the tabloid rags and get a bit of momentum behind him. I think quite a few racists would be willing to adopt him as "he's not like the others, he's a good one" in the way misogynists don't consider Thatcher in the same light as they do other women.
Puja wrote:I don't actually know that his skin colour will be that big of an issue if he can get the support of one of the tabloid rags and get a bit of momentum behind him. I think quite a few racists would be willing to adopt him as "he's not like the others, he's a good one" in the way misogynists don't consider Thatcher in the same light as they do other women.
Prime example being Priti Umbridge, who's absolutely adored by both the racist and the misogynists (the Venn Diagram of which is practically a single circle)
Say what you will for Thatcher she did prove a woman could do the job, and if it takes some racists to elect the first BAME to being PM then some good will come of all this.
In other news the 2nd person in my family to contract Covid after a 2nd vaccine was visited by my mother before they tested positive, it turns out my mother knew there were symptoms but in her desperate desire to insert herself into other peoples lives she went over there to ask if they needed anything and of course stayed for a chat, in the garden mostly (she says), and my mother is now showing suggestive symptoms. Brilliantly she has during the intervening period visited my family, where we're only one jab into proceedings each, and I can easily observe I'm developing something of a nasty headache, just been out to pick up some lateral flow tests (btw they might might start to ration these somewhat or even charge for them soon in case one wanted to get a few kits in now). At least mum is double jabbed
Digby wrote:Say what you will for Thatcher she did prove a woman could do the job, and if it takes some racists to elect the first BAME to being PM then some good will come of all this.
In other news the 2nd person in my family to contract Covid after a 2nd vaccine was visited by my mother before they tested positive, it turns out my mother knew there were symptoms but in her desperate desire to insert herself into other peoples lives she went over there to ask if they needed anything and of course stayed for a chat, in the garden mostly (she says), and my mother is now showing suggestive symptoms. Brilliantly she has during the intervening period visited my family, where we're only one jab into proceedings each, and I can easily observe I'm developing something of a nasty headache, just been out to pick up some lateral flow tests (btw they might might start to ration these somewhat or even charge for them soon in case one wanted to get a few kits in now). At least mum is double jabbed
Shit, sorry to hear that. Hope it's just a summer cold rather than the plague. I'm impressed by your test-and-trace protocols though, although it could just be that my standards have been lowered by watching Dido Harding's efforts.
TBH, there are far worse options for PM than Javid (Boris Johnson, for example). I do find it odd that the Conservatives are regularly far better at promoting diverse candidates than the ostensibly more socially conscious parties. Labour wouldn't dream of selecting anyone not white, male, and greying to their leadership.
morepork wrote:Diggers...if you have been exposed to a vaccine, you will almost certainly have antibodies, infected or not. Can you cut straight to PCR?
I suspect come tomorrow morning there'll be a request I do get a PCR test, the lateral tests are so far showing negative in the household but possible symptoms are present in both adults, the kid is merely showing evidence of extreme boredom and laziness. One shot of the AV jab is showing up as having a positive impact here, just not a huge one and nothing like the double vaccine + a few weeks, but tbh most people are okay, and the treatments are pretty good so on an individual basis it's not especially exciting, about as exciting as it gets for me is the notion I'll be drinking water later not wine, good times.
Puja wrote: I'm impressed by your test-and-trace protocols though, although it could just be that my standards have been lowered by watching Dido Harding's efforts.
Technically I shouldn't have gone out, I should have been isolating as having had 1st person contact with someone who's tested positive. But I rationalised it by wearing a filter face mask, using a (clean) hanky to open the door at the chemists and requesting they bring me the tests to the door rather than going inside. I passed nobody on the street either way and there was no one in the the pharmacy other than the person minding the till as I'd waited for the previous customer to exit. Still, it's hardly best practice.
Puja wrote: I'm impressed by your test-and-trace protocols though, although it could just be that my standards have been lowered by watching Dido Harding's efforts.
Technically I shouldn't have gone out, I should have been isolating as having had 1st person contact with someone who's tested positive. But I rationalised it by wearing a filter face mask, using a (clean) hanky to open the door at the chemists and requesting they bring me the tests to the door rather than going inside. I passed nobody on the street either way and there was no one in the the pharmacy other than the person minding the till as I'd waited for the previous customer to exit. Still, it's hardly best practice.
Technically, on the off chance anyone was even mildly under the impression I knew what I was talking about, that's bollocks.
As a 2nd person contact I'm not required to isolate unless the 1st person contact has tested positive, which they hadn't and still haven't, nor have any of the LFs in this household tested positive, PCRs are en route nonetheless. My headache seemingly has gone, perhaps it's coincidence my mother, the missus and I all started showing varying and highly suggestive strong symptoms of Covid after my mother was a 1st person contact to someone who's tested positive. The missus and my mother are both feeling better today too, fingers crossed it stays that way, at least for the missus.
Ha haaaaaa double jabbed!! Covid can get tae [emoji867][emoji867][emoji16]
Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk
It was so much easier to blame Them. It was bleakly depressing to think They were Us. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Just 10 months ago Richard Branson was pleading for a small 0.5 billion government bailout because of COVUD, and today he is the first privately funded citizen to reach outer space! That's what I call pulling your socks up, working hard, and saving your pennies for the stuff that really matters.
Hard to say in advance what really matters when it comes to breakthroughs/developments. We make all sorts of progressions and we don't need every such progression to have an obvious/immediate benefit to the societal good, or to equate it to how many nurses would that pay for line of thinking.
In the household I'm the last holdout for testing positive, just failed on another lateral flow test, or put another way I continue to be negative. Though I remain amused they're marked to return a result of 'C' when you've succesfully used the test, it seems such a stupid marking designed to create work through people contacting to say it's marked 'C' they have Covid. Kid has a slight headache and feels a bit crappy, missus is running a temp over 38 and really feels crappy. A shame as I could have had my 2nd jab this week
You should be having one PCR test at the beginning of feeling symptomatic and one 10-15 days after that. There are a few approved self-sample kits that you could use.
Or you could stay in a get your day drink on and wait for all this to blow over.
Digby wrote:Should get the results of the PCR later today.
And whether another business should be funded by the taxpayer seems a different thing to whether Branson should also be heading off into space.
Really? He owns both Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Galactic. Back in March 2020, he declared that all Virgin Atlantic staff needed to take 8 weeks unpaid holiday because of the pandemic (thankfully averted with the invention of government sponsored furlough). He then successfully lobbied for a £500 million bailout from the government because otherwise "his business would go under." Yet he as the owner of Virgin Atlantic clearly has surplus capital, not just in terms of going into space, but in terms of having a personal wealth of £3.8bn from profits from his businesses. Surely the way capitalism is *supposed* to work is that he is then responsible for using that profit that he's stockpiled away during the good years to deal with unexpected event and unprofitable periods, not leech off the government (which, as a citizen of the British Virgin Islands, he no longer even contributes any personal tax to)?
Digby wrote:Should get the results of the PCR later today.
And whether another business should be funded by the taxpayer seems a different thing to whether Branson should also be heading off into space.
Really? He owns both Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Galactic. Back in March 2020, he declared that all Virgin Atlantic staff needed to take 8 weeks unpaid holiday because of the pandemic (thankfully averted with the invention of government sponsored furlough). He then successfully lobbied for a £500 million bailout from the government because otherwise "his business would go under." Yet he as the owner of Virgin Atlantic clearly has surplus capital, not just in terms of going into space, but in terms of having a personal wealth of £3.8bn from profits from his businesses. Surely the way capitalism is *supposed* to work is that he is then responsible for using that profit that he's stockpiled away during the good years to deal with unexpected event and unprofitable periods, not leech off the government (which, as a citizen of the British Virgin Islands, he no longer even contributes any personal tax to)?
Puja
There are two potential lines of criticism here it seems and then I'm not quite sure what the intended solution is. That the businesses with the same (partial) ownership should cross subsidise, or the (partial) owner of a businesses should utilise some/all private wealth before seeking public monies. And both of those even overlooking existing legislation could have some very unintended consequences if just rolled out across society.
Fwiw I'm with Aristotle (so this is hardly new thinking) on the hoarding side of things when it comes to money in a capital system, that it doesn't benefit society to have the super rich stash their cash away and it'd be better getting reinvested into the business. But that looks something we could/should be addressing ahead of and separately to something like furlough in a pandemic. The named businesses are almost certainly different entities and one or more either qualifies for support or doesn't, that an owner is rich and/or has different businesses interests isn't relevant, partly it just isn't, and partly deciding on what the rules should be and then trying to enact them would be very tricky
