Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:38 pm Patronising? Really?

Yes Malc.

I'm perfectly aware of Wakefield, and I'm perfectly aware of why flu vaccines are an annual event.

Got anything else constructive to add? Or are you going to stick to "the electorate are stupid"?

Apparently not.

I'll go away then...

Boiler wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:38 pm
A slightly patronising response from you there Crabs, but I still favour science over luck.

Feller, I am a scientist who has been involved in the pandemic response. I know what science is and what you can and can't extrapolate from what you know. People made informed hypotheses about a lot of things in relation to vaccines based on the science of how other vaccines work and what they expected to happen - with the increased gap between doses, with how well they would work at suppressing transmission, how they would hold up against new variants etc. But it's still luck that those hypotheses worked out and/or results were better than expected rather than as expected or (obviously) worse than expected. You can't guarantee results as you never know what seemingly insignificant factor can throw things off, or would have led to a chain of events meaning we'd be at a very different point now. That's the luck element. It doesn't have to be one catastrophic thing, it could just have been a snowball of things being suboptimal.

Apologies if it came over as patronising, though.

Science and luck aren't mutually exclusive.

In the words of Johnson's role model, Sir Harry Flashman VC, you only have to be lucky at the end.

Boiler wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:38 pm
I still favour science over luck.

That's as maybe, but for some of us historical fact trumps revisionist fantasy.

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:53 pm

Boiler wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:38 pm
A slightly patronising response from you there Crabs, but I still favour science over luck.

Feller, I am a scientist who has been involved in the pandemic response. I know what science is and what you can and can't extrapolate from what you know. People made informed hypotheses about a lot of things in relation to vaccines based on the science of how other vaccines work and what they expected to happen - with the increased gap between doses, with how well they would work at suppressing transmission, how they would hold up against new variants etc. But it's still luck that those hypotheses worked out and/or results were better than expected rather than as expected or (obviously) worse than expected. You can't guarantee results as you never know what seemingly insignificant factor can throw things off, or would have led to a chain of events meaning we'd be at a very different point now. That's the luck element. It doesn't have to be one catastrophic thing, it could just have been a snowball of things being suboptimal.

Apologies if it came over as patronising, though.

Apology gladly accepted, Crabs. This must have been a hellish fifteen months for you.

C'mon boys; we've all had a drink...

Killer Whale wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 1:09 pm C'mon boys; we've all had a drink...

Chance be a fine thing,

Killer Whale wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 1:09 pm C'mon boys; we've all had a drink...

Speak for yourself.

Boiler wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 1:07 pm
Apology gladly accepted, Crabs. This must have been a hellish fifteen months for you.

I’ve had some busy periods but I can’t pretend my tiny bit of it is even in the same league as frontline care staff or researchers. What I can tell you is that despite that, a lot of them still volunteered their time to help out with developing national guidance and they genuinely are heroes.

Is anybody else not that bothered about the election results for Labour. I mean, of course the media are blow it all up out of all proportions, and Starmer's probably going to have to go on Marr's and eat shit from him, but was it really unexpected? In England?

I think the main problem for Labour is that the majority of people will only give a fuck if it's them personally being affected. They don't give a shit about foodbanks and the like, so long as they're doing all right. The Tory party is a party of "I'm all right, Jack", for "I'm all right, Jack"'s, and for all the soul searching Labour will do, I think they're basically stuffed until the Tories fuck up big time.

Which they will do, eventually, as populism and three-word slogans will only go so far. They've made a lot of promises to their new found support and there's still a lot of problems to deal with besides COVID. You can guarantee that Teflon Johnson will do a bunk before the shit hits the fan and it will be left to someone like Raab, Gove, or even Liz Truss to carry the can.

Personally, I'd be pleasantly surprised if we have a Labour government before the end of the decade, but I wouldn't be surprised if we don't. It's just the way this country seems to be now.

I'd love to know precisely which Left MP's Mason has in mind to be ushered back into the shadow cabinet, presumably as returning heroes. RLB has clearly burned her bridges with Starmer, and even gave the impression of not being especially bothered about losing her job. I'd have Lewis back, and that is probably it. I've always quite liked McDonnell, but his time has almost certainly come and gone.

After that, I'm drawing a blank.

It's that interesting definition of democratic that means "everyone agrees with me".

I'm old enough to remember when Andy Burnham was a Blairite traitor.

Or "Mr. Mid-Staffs" as every bugger painted him.

Because no Tory ever presided over a fuck-up in the NHS, no Sir.

Boiler wrote: ↑Sat May 08, 2021 1:56 pm Or "Mr. Mid-Staffs" as every bugger painted him.

Because no Tory ever presided over a fuck-up in the NHS, no Sir.

To be fair the number of deaths Johnson has overseen on his watch kind of overshadows that now.