Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast: Reshuffles, Oprah and exclus

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited January 11 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast: Reshuffles, Oprah and exclusive polling on Brexit and trust

The PB / Polling Matters podcast returns for a new year with a new format.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,309
    In first, unlike those caught reading the Daily Mail on Virgin trains.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    edited January 11
    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 5,110
    Huffington Post says

    Theresa May is facing fresh reshuffle embarrassment amid claims that she breached the Ministerial Code with her Downing Street PR stunt to promote the Tory party’s new top ranks.

    Labour has written to the Prime Minister to complain that she was in clear breach of rules which forbid the use of any Government and taxpayer-funded property for party political purposes, HuffPost can reveal.

    May led a parade of Conservative party chairmen and vice-chairmen in Downing Street on Monday as she started her shake-up of ministerial ranks.

    The Conservative Party subsequently retweeted the picture on both their main twitter account and the Conservative Press account.

    But just one of the appointees, party chairman Brandon Lewis, was given a Government post and the rest were all party jobs.

    Section 6 of the Ministerial Code – which was updated only this week - says that Government property should not be used for “party political activities”, a strict rule that carries sanctions if breached.

    Tory spokesperson says some party activity is allowed at 10 Downing St.

    I noted that they were standing on the pavement when the photo was taken, so not on government property but council property.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617

    I noted that they were standing on the pavement when the photo was taken, so not on government property but council property.

    Cabinet photo taken inside number 10. New CCHQ team taken on pavement - looks like they knew what they were doing (or got lucky)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,400

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    That's quite a good reply :-)
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 2,866

    Huffington Post says

    Theresa May is facing fresh reshuffle embarrassment amid claims that she breached the Ministerial Code with her Downing Street PR stunt to promote the Tory party’s new top ranks.

    Labour has written to the Prime Minister to complain that she was in clear breach of rules which forbid the use of any Government and taxpayer-funded property for party political purposes, HuffPost can reveal.

    May led a parade of Conservative party chairmen and vice-chairmen in Downing Street on Monday as she started her shake-up of ministerial ranks.

    The Conservative Party subsequently retweeted the picture on both their main twitter account and the Conservative Press account.

    But just one of the appointees, party chairman Brandon Lewis, was given a Government post and the rest were all party jobs.

    Section 6 of the Ministerial Code – which was updated only this week - says that Government property should not be used for “party political activities”, a strict rule that carries sanctions if breached.

    Tory spokesperson says some party activity is allowed at 10 Downing St.

    I noted that they were standing on the pavement when the photo was taken, so not on government property but council property.

    Council property to which the council tax payers of Westminster are denied access.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637
    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    edited January 11
    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
    I'm reasonably well aware of current research (Novartis, for example has a vaccine in PII), and there is great science being done, but I think you are underestimating both the time to develop these therapies, and the likelihood of failure.
    As an example, the Novartis trial is recruiting patients now; they don't expect meaningful result since for at least five years. And that's a single stage of a trial. (An Alzheimer's vaccine was trialled and abandoned as far back as 2002.)

    I don't denigrate any of the efforts here - indeed given the cost and relatively low chances of success, the persistence of some companies in funding research has been heroic - and every failure provides more data, but similar optimism has been expressed over the last decade or more, only to be crushed.

    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    rcs1000 said:

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    That's quite a good reply :-)
    I particularly liked the final paragraph reminding Trump et al that 'document preservation' and presumably, during any trial, discovery & disclosure, cuts both ways!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    Is this the real reason Young stepped down ?
    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/10/ucl-to-investigate-secret-eugenics-conference-held-on-campus
    Goes way beyond a few off colour remarks on twitter.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,144
    And as could entirely be expected, the Oprah backlash begins:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/oprah-winfrey-fame-hungry-peddler-fake-empathy-would-terrible/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    Sandpit said:
    I think you're giving a little too much credit to the Telegraph.
    Rather more liberal publications (Slate, for example) have already expressed serious reservations. That a Telegraph opinion writer should publish a disobliging piece is rather less surprising, and of little consequence - after all, it's Democrats who will decide the fate of her would be candidacy.

    (FWIW, I think her encouragement of crank opinions on for example vaccines ought to be disqualificatory.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    China not hugely enthusiastic about The Last Jedi:
    http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1001531/chinas-die-hard-star-wars-fans-respond-to-last-jedi-flop
    The most upvoted review complains that “the whole film really insults the IQ of its audience,” and demands to know how the universe could possibly be ruled by such an incompetent Galactic Empire. “In Star Wars, it seems only Darth Vader had a brain — it’s such a shame he’s already dead,” the reviewer concludes.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,144
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:
    I think you're giving a little too much credit to the Telegraph.
    Rather more liberal publications (Slate, for example) have already expressed serious reservations. That a Telegraph opinion writer should publish a disobliging piece is rather less surprising, and of little consequence - after all, it's Democrats who will decide the fate of her would be candidacy.

    (FWIW, I think her encouragement of crank opinions on for example vaccines ought to be disqualificatory.)
    Absolutely, she has never really had her views on anything properly examined, she will have had commercial endorsements ‘helping’ form her views on a lot of subjects (as these things are not as regulated in the US as they are in the U.K.), and will undoubtedly have made a fair number of enemies on her way to the very top of a very greasy pole.

    Lay at 10/1. Probably lay at 25/1 on the savings account principle.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:
    I think you're giving a little too much credit to the Telegraph.
    Rather more liberal publications (Slate, for example) have already expressed serious reservations. That a Telegraph opinion writer should publish a disobliging piece is rather less surprising, and of little consequence - after all, it's Democrats who will decide the fate of her would be candidacy.

    (FWIW, I think her encouragement of crank opinions on for example vaccines ought to be disqualificatory.)
    Absolutely, she has never really had her views on anything properly examined, she will have had commercial endorsements ‘helping’ form her views on a lot of subjects (as these things are not as regulated in the US as they are in the U.K.), and will undoubtedly have made a fair number of enemies on her way to the very top of a very greasy pole.

    Lay at 10/1. Probably lay at 25/1 on the savings account principle.
    I'm happy to close out trading bets, but I'd be slightly hesitant to actively bet against her candidacy just yet. She's a celebrity with a lot of money, and far more popular than Trump. Betting on the rationality of the US electorate has not always been the best strategy...

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,382
    Nigelb said:

    China not hugely enthusiastic about The Last Jedi:
    http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1001531/chinas-die-hard-star-wars-fans-respond-to-last-jedi-flop
    The most upvoted review complains that “the whole film really insults the IQ of its audience,” and demands to know how the universe could possibly be ruled by such an incompetent Galactic Empire. “In Star Wars, it seems only Darth Vader had a brain — it’s such a shame he’s already dead,” the reviewer concludes.

    That's hilarious. I hope the Daily Mash make something of that.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    edited January 11
    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,088

    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Is there a score for Barnier?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617

    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Is there a score for Barnier?
    No. They were UK politicians including Farage, Adonis etc. Worth listening to the whole podcast or if you are short of time the polling data is towards the end.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466
    85-year-old convicted criminal doing well in GOP Arizona nomination race:
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/az/arizona_senate_republican_primary-6235.html
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,149

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
    I'm reasonably well aware of current research (Novartis, for example has a vaccine in PII), and there is great science being done, but I think you are underestimating both the time to develop these therapies, and the likelihood of failure.
    As an example, the Novartis trial is recruiting patients now; they don't expect meaningful result since for at least five years. And that's a single stage of a trial. (An Alzheimer's vaccine was trialled and abandoned as far back as 2002.)

    I don't denigrate any of the efforts here - indeed given the cost and relatively low chances of success, the persistence of some companies in funding research has been heroic - and every failure provides more data, but similar optimism has been expressed over the last decade or more, only to be crushed.

    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

    NVS doesn’t think their product will work. Of course likelihood is low - but I’ve looked at some of the blinded data - obviously only trends and correlations - from other trials and it looks exciting
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,149

    85-year-old convicted criminal doing well in GOP Arizona nomination race:
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/az/arizona_senate_republican_primary-6235.html

    AZ a good opportunity for Dems I reckon.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    edited January 11
    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Without seeing the data it’s impossible to say.

    Adonis had a high level of don’t knows but also a quite high negative rating.

    And there’s no “probably” about Blair being the worst person to front rejoin. “Unequivocaly” is nearer the mark
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,262
    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
    I'm reasonably well aware of current research (Novartis, for example has a vaccine in PII), and there is great science being done, but I think you are underestimating both the time to develop these therapies, and the likelihood of failure.
    As an example, the Novartis trial is recruiting patients now; they don't expect meaningful result since for at least five years. And that's a single stage of a trial. (An Alzheimer's vaccine was trialled and abandoned as far back as 2002.)



    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

    NVS doesn’t think their product will work. Of course likelihood is low - but I’ve looked at some of the blinded data - obviously only trends and correlations - from other trials and it looks exciting
    Emphasises the difficulty of medico-pharmacaceutical research. Far too easy to get misleading data from early trials.

    I suspect, only suspect, because I’m well out of touch now, that we might get somewhere on Alzheimers fairly soon, but it’ll be around the prevention, or prevention of further deterioration. We’re a long way from reversal.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
    I'm reasonably well aware of current research (Novartis, for example has a vaccine in PII), and there is great science being done, but I think you are underestimating both the time to develop these therapies, and the likelihood of failure.
    As an example, the Novartis trial is recruiting patients now; they don't expect meaningful result since for at least five years. And that's a single stage of a trial. (An Alzheimer's vaccine was trialled and abandoned as far back as 2002.)



    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

    NVS doesn’t think their product will work. Of course likelihood is low - but I’ve looked at some of the blinded data - obviously only trends and correlations - from other trials and it looks exciting
    Emphasises the difficulty of medico-pharmacaceutical research. Far too easy to get misleading data from early trials.

    I suspect, only suspect, because I’m well out of touch now, that we might get somewhere on Alzheimers fairly soon, but it’ll be around the prevention, or prevention of further deterioration. We’re a long way from reversal.
    Totally agree - that’s why I think it’s a vaccine first. I suspect reversal won’t be possible and we’ll be left with symptomatic treatments.

    Some of the data from DIAN is just incredible
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,144
    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,149
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
    I don’t think the electorate much cares about trade deals. But in any case - it will probably be decades before we have more trade deals than the EU.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,173
    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope to listen to the podcast through the day (mostly writing so listening to speech is a bit tricky to do at the same time).
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,885
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
    I don’t think the electorate much cares about trade deals. But in any case - it will probably be decades before we have more trade deals than the EU.
    It could be a long time before we have any trade deals worth speaking of, other than the exit compromise with the EU if we get one.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    What kind of world is it in which right-wing columnists appointed to quangos by their political mates cannot join white supremacists and anti-Semites at events focused on killing off the socially inferior? It's political correctness gone mad.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    IanB2 said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
    I don’t think the electorate much cares about trade deals. But in any case - it will probably be decades before we have more trade deals than the EU.
    It could be a long time before we have any trade deals worth speaking of, other than the exit compromise with the EU if we get one.

    My guess is that we will end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU does in future, with some UK-specific terms that do not have an impact on our relationship with the single market. It will be a part of our symbolic but not real life departure.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.
    I'm reasonably well aware of current research (Novartis, for example has a vaccine in PII), and there is great science being done, but I think you are underestimating both the time to develop these therapies, and the likelihood of failure.
    As an example, the Novartis trial is recruiting patients now; they don't expect meaningful result since for at least five years. And that's a single stage of a trial. (An Alzheimer's vaccine was trialled and abandoned as far back as 2002.)

    I don't denigrate any of the efforts here - indeed given the cost and relatively low chances of success, the persistence of some companies in funding research has been heroic - and every failure provides more data, but similar optimism has been expressed over the last decade or more, only to be crushed.

    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

    NVS doesn’t think their product will work. Of course likelihood is low - but I’ve looked at some of the blinded data...
    If that's the case it's odd, not to say unethical for them to be recruiting for a couple of trials with thousands of patients for the next half decade...
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02565511

    And wouldn't the latter be unpublished, price sensitive information ?
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,098
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
    Why should they? Most people allowed the numpty Leavers to rant for many years, before they were able to put their "facts" before the UK electorate, and for whatever reason, won the referendum. The consensus now is that we will leave the EU. The how, why and when is under discussion, but why the hell should people not be allowed to have a different opinion and voice, or is that only the right of the Pure BeLeavers who dislike the problems and inconsistencies of their arguments being pointed out to them? This country is a democracy of sorts with reasonable freedom of speech and thought, not some alternative that a few would like it to be...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,018

    Huffington Post says

    Theresa May is facing fresh reshuffle embarrassment amid claims that she breached the Ministerial Code with her Downing Street PR stunt to promote the Tory party’s new top ranks.

    Labour has written to the Prime Minister to complain that she was in clear breach of rules which forbid the use of any Government and taxpayer-funded property for party political purposes, HuffPost can reveal.

    May led a parade of Conservative party chairmen and vice-chairmen in Downing Street on Monday as she started her shake-up of ministerial ranks.

    The Conservative Party subsequently retweeted the picture on both their main twitter account and the Conservative Press account.

    But just one of the appointees, party chairman Brandon Lewis, was given a Government post and the rest were all party jobs.

    Section 6 of the Ministerial Code – which was updated only this week - says that Government property should not be used for “party political activities”, a strict rule that carries sanctions if breached.

    Tory spokesperson says some party activity is allowed at 10 Downing St.

    I noted that they were standing on the pavement when the photo was taken, so not on government property but council property.

    Council property to which the council tax payers of Westminster are denied access.
    Are council tax payers usually able to access anywhere so long as their council owns it? I wouldn't have thought so, even if a restricted pavement would be unusual.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,885

    Huffington Post says

    Theresa May is facing fresh reshuffle embarrassment amid claims that she breached the Ministerial Code with her Downing Street PR stunt to promote the Tory party’s new top ranks.

    Labour has written to the Prime Minister to complain that she was in clear breach of rules which forbid the use of any Government and taxpayer-funded property for party political purposes, HuffPost can reveal.

    May led a parade of Conservative party chairmen and vice-chairmen in Downing Street on Monday as she started her shake-up of ministerial ranks.

    The Conservative Party subsequently retweeted the picture on both their main twitter account and the Conservative Press account.

    But just one of the appointees, party chairman Brandon Lewis, was given a Government post and the rest were all party jobs.

    Section 6 of the Ministerial Code – which was updated only this week - says that Government property should not be used for “party political activities”, a strict rule that carries sanctions if breached.

    Tory spokesperson says some party activity is allowed at 10 Downing St.

    I noted that they were standing on the pavement when the photo was taken, so not on government property but council property.

    Council property to which the council tax payers of Westminster are denied access.
    They key question here will be who employs the photographer.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,018

    85-year-old convicted criminal doing well in GOP Arizona nomination race:
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/az/arizona_senate_republican_primary-6235.html

    For their sake the Republicans need to learn the lesson of Roy Moore.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,144

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.

    Australia and NZ are just not big enough to act as any kind of barrier to rejoining the EU. Given the deal we are likely to end up with - which will essentially be leaving in name only in terms of our current relationship, but a red line with regards to any further political integration - I doubt there will be a huge push for us to rejoin.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615
    Gove confronted on Good Morning Britain about Ann Widdecombe's allegation on Celebrity Big Brother that he stabbed Boris Johnson 'in the front and back'
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,088
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    That depends on whether our economy is bigger than the country we are negotiating with and whether they export more to us than we do to them
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,040

    Nigelb said:

    China not hugely enthusiastic about The Last Jedi:
    http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1001531/chinas-die-hard-star-wars-fans-respond-to-last-jedi-flop
    The most upvoted review complains that “the whole film really insults the IQ of its audience,” and demands to know how the universe could possibly be ruled by such an incompetent Galactic Empire. “In Star Wars, it seems only Darth Vader had a brain — it’s such a shame he’s already dead,” the reviewer concludes.

    That's hilarious. I hope the Daily Mash make something of that.
    And yet, they lap up such cerebal masterpieces like 'Transformers: The Last Knight'
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,796

    And there’s no “probably” about Blair being the worst person to front rejoin. “Unequivocaly” is nearer the mark

    Possible exception of Nigel Farage?

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,328
    OchEye said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.
    Why should they? Most people allowed the numpty Leavers to rant for many years, before they were able to put their "facts" before the UK electorate, and for whatever reason, won the referendum. The consensus now is that we will leave the EU. The how, why and when is under discussion, but why the hell should people not be allowed to have a different opinion and voice, or is that only the right of the Pure BeLeavers who dislike the problems and inconsistencies of their arguments being pointed out to them? This country is a democracy of sorts with reasonable freedom of speech and thought, not some alternative that a few would like it to be...
    Quite so. Note the ludicrous response when I (and others) suggest that this obsession with the nativist brexiteers and neobrexiteers with ending free movement is wrecking the chance of a decent deal. That's a perfectly reasonable argument, whether one favours FOM or not, and yet such ideas are treated as heresy. The self-branded democrats of the brexit right are notably undemocratic in their behaviour!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    That depends on whether our economy is bigger than the country we are negotiating with and whether they export more to us than we do to them

    Yep - if we are going to focus on seeking trade deals that will make very little difference to anything at all, we could get some with countries on relatively decent terms.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,173
    Mr. HYUFD, that's actually a pretty good result for May given Corbyn can appear to face both ways whereas she has to actually try to thread the needle.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,144

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
    We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
    We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.

    What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what we have at the moment and that will deliver greater standards of living than we have at the moment? We are going to have to do a huge number of trade deals to get even remotely close to what we will give up by leaving the single market. That, of course, is why when push comes to shove we will be leaving in name only.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,885
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    You forget to mention that Boris's score is down there with the other political has-beens.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,328

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    Why have you got a picture of Theresa May waving a lightsaber as your avatar?
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,328
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    And by the same token a great opportunity for Labour if they can find a better leader.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    That depends on whether our economy is bigger than the country we are negotiating with and whether they export more to us than we do to them

    Yep - if we are going to focus on seeking trade deals that will make very little difference to anything at all, we could get some with countries on relatively decent terms.

    Of course China exports more to us than we do to them and we are a bigger economy than Switzerland and export only a little more to them than they do to us
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,040
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    Yep, although things are 'bad' at the moment for the tories. They at least have more opportunity for change. The Corbyn movement is locked into it's current path with JC/JD.

    It'll take some changes for the tories. They need new blood, and new bold ideas. But things like the manifesto and the leader couldn't be as bad as the last GE.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,040
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    And by the same token a great opportunity for Labour if they can find a better leader.
    At the moment the only way that Corbyn isn't leader at the next GE is his health. That's not likely for May.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
    We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.

    What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what we have at the moment and that will deliver greater standards of living than we have at the moment? We are going to have to do a huge number of trade deals to get even remotely close to what we will give up by leaving the single market. That, of course, is why when push comes to shove we will be leaving in name only.

    The customs union you mean, Norway is in the single market but outside the customs union in EFTA
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,262
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT, I think Charles was being remarkably optimistic about effective Alzheimer's treatments being available within a decade.
    The number of promising therapies which have failed after decade long trials is considerable, including antibodies against beta amyloid (Pfizer gave up on its antibody bapineuzumab, which had been in trials since 2007, at the end of last year, and pretty well abandoned Alzheimer's research).

    Surprises are not utterly impossible, but given the current highly imperfect understanding of the disease process, the difficulty of running Alzheimer's trials (the patients likely to be enrolled already have significant disease progression) and the lengthy process to show any effect, compared to say cancer, the idea that there will be a preventive vaccine on the market within a decade is utterly unrealistic, IMO.
    I'd probably double that.

    Bapi was old news. People know why it - and sola - failed. Adamenuzamab (which I can never spell!) is good as far as it goes (that’s BIIB’s product). But there is serious work ongoing - just look at companies like Denali or UNS or others - and the science looks really good.

    Yes, huge strides have been made in immunology, but the difficulty of targeting the brain means that we are at a fairly early stage in fully understating what we're doing. Couple that with the very limited understanding of Alzheimer's itself, and the likelihood of any single therapy proving successful is low.

    NVS doesn’t think their product will work. Of course likelihood is low - but I’ve looked at some of the blinded data - obviously only trends and correlations - from other trials and it looks exciting
    Emphasises the difficulty of medico-pharmacaceutical research. Far too easy to get misleading data from early trials.

    I suspect, only suspect, because I’m well out of touch now, that we might get somewhere on Alzheimers fairly soon, but it’ll be around the prevention, or prevention of further deterioration. We’re a long way from reversal.
    Totally agree - that’s why I think it’s a vaccine first. I suspect reversal won’t be possible and we’ll be left with symptomatic treatments.

    Some of the data from DIAN is just incredible
    Thanks for the heads-up on DIAN. I’m a little surprised at your thoughts on a vaccine but you’re much more in touch that I am.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    Mr. HYUFD, that's actually a pretty good result for May given Corbyn can appear to face both ways whereas she has to actually try to thread the needle.

    Yes, he is still her get out of jail card despite her problems
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    Maybe not a bloke to die in a ditch for ...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
    We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.

    What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what we have at the moment and that will deliver greater standards of living than we have at the moment? We are going to have to do a huge number of trade deals to get even remotely close to what we will give up by leaving the single market. That, of course, is why when push comes to shove we will be leaving in name only.

    The customs union you mean, Norway is in the single market but outside the customs union in EFTA

    No, I mean the single market. Leaving the customs union is just the icing on the cake.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    You forget to mention that Boris's score is down there with the other political has-beens.
    Last Survation comparing Boris to May had Boris getting a higher Tory voteshare than May but a higher Labour voteshare
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    And by the same token a great opportunity for Labour if they can find a better leader.
    Except the general election result ensures they won't, Labour members overwhelmingly want Corbyn to fight the next general election while Tory members do not want May to fight the next general election
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,113
    Anazina said:

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    Why have you got a picture of Theresa May waving a lightsaber as your avatar?
    Why have you got a picture of a clown has your avatar ;-)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Looks like Carney is the best front for Remainia and Blair and Clegg should stay as far away from it as possible. May and Corbyn equally unpopular which gives some hope for the Tories if they can find a new leader at the next general election with more appeal, otherwise we are looking at another hung parliament
    Yep, although things are 'bad' at the moment for the tories. They at least have more opportunity for change. The Corbyn movement is locked into it's current path with JC/JD.

    It'll take some changes for the tories. They need new blood, and new bold ideas. But things like the manifesto and the leader couldn't be as bad as the last GE.
    Corbyn tax rises need to be the focus
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,362
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    That depends on whether our economy is bigger than the country we are negotiating with and whether they export more to us than we do to them

    Yep - if we are going to focus on seeking trade deals that will make very little difference to anything at all, we could get some with countries on relatively decent terms.

    Of course China exports more to us than we do to them and we are a bigger economy than Switzerland and export only a little more to them than they do to us

    Yep, so China is doing fine with us at the moment. And under WTO rules we cannot change the tariffs its companies currently pay - unless we change them for everyone. We are about to become a market of 65 million, as opposed to being part of one of 450 million - and every country in the world outside the EU - our biggest export market - will continue to have exactly the same access as they have now. In order to secure trade deals, we have to offer better access than that.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,796

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    People cottoning on to Corbyn being Brexit's Bezzy Mate..... Not a fag paper between him and May.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615
    edited January 11

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.

    We also need to get some good trade deals in place as soon as possible after we leave the EU. Not only is it good per se, but makes rejoining the EU later all the more difficult - it’s clear the Remainers aren’t going to give up even after we’ve left.

    Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.

    My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.
    It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.
    We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.

    What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what omes to shove we will be leaving in name only.

    The customs union you mean, Norway is in the single market but outside the customs union in EFTA

    No, I mean the single market. Leaving the customs union is just the icing on the cake.

    Staying in the customs union would actually give more respect to the Leave vote than staying in the single market which requires free movement and ECJ jurisdiction and Labour is making some moves towards staying in the customs union if possible even if we still leave the single market. That would be similar to the position Turkey is moving towards
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    People cottoning on to Corbyn being Brexit's Bezzy Mate..... Not a fag paper between him and May.
    There is a fag paper between them, but that's all he needs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,276
    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
    Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    Jonathan said:

    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    Good morning all.

    I'm (as always) going to plump for cock-up over conspiracy.

    Reading downthread, it's always a bit saddening to see fellow Brexit-folk being daft. It seems perfectly reasonable that people who disagree with Brexit should campaign to rejoin after we leave. Similarly, if there were ever a mandate to rejoin, whether via an election or referendum, then we'd have to respect that. My view is that this is an unlikely scenario, but stranger things have happened in my lifetime.

    Democracy is a process, not an event. Brexit will cause economic pain and will have more drawbacks than benefits in the short term. Whether there'll be a compensatory benefits in the medium term is still up in the air. It's no wonder people are still cross.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617

    And there’s no “probably” about Blair being the worst person to front rejoin. “Unequivocaly” is nearer the mark

    Possible exception of Nigel Farage?

    Farage has a better less atrocious trust rating than Blair on Brexit....
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
    Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
    God no.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,246
    Morning everyone! 442 days until Brexit...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    Anazina said:

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    Why have you got a picture of Theresa May waving a lightsaber as your avatar?
    Why not?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,615
    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466

    Anazina said:

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    Why have you got a picture of Theresa May waving a lightsaber as your avatar?
    Why not?
    It's a freeze-frame just before she severs her left arm, drops the saber and impales her foot. A metaphor for her administration.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,088
    edited January 11
    German economy posts strongest growth for 6 years at 2.2% in 2017.
  • HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.

    That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,387
    Jonathan said:

    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    It makes you wonder what chummy responses to the wackos who attended the conference that Young deleted from his Twitter history.

    I noticed one of the 'intelligence' nutjobs he follows was retweeting any and all articles in support of Young.
  • German economy posts strongest growth for 6 years at 2.2% in 2017.

    Yesterday it was suggested we had grown by 0.6% last quarter, so that is equal to 2.4% annual increase
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488
    John_M said:

    Anazina said:

    Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.

    FPT:

    A slightly longer reply than that given in Arkell vs Presdram - though the sentiment is identical:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/368696619/Letter-to-C-Harder-001

    Why have you got a picture of Theresa May waving a lightsaber as your avatar?
    Why not?
    It's a freeze-frame just before she severs her left arm, drops the saber and impales her foot. A metaphor for her administration.
    No, it's a nod to the fact that the Force is with her, because she did such a good job over relations with the Police Federation at the HO.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 13,433
    Jonathan said:

    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    I think there's explicit not tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    The issue with Young isn't to do with issues, its to do with language.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,836
    John_M said:

    Jonathan said:

    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    Good morning all.

    I'm (as always) going to plump for cock-up over conspiracy....
    Seems likely. This conference seems to have been very much off the radar even of the university which hosted it. From the Guardian article I linked to upthread:

    ...Young has also resigned from his post on the Fulbright Commission, which oversees student scholarship programmes between British and US universities.

    Sir Nigel Sheinwald, chair of the US-UK Fulbright Commission, said: “I accepted his resignation, which I believe to be in the best interests of the Fulbright programme.”

    UCL said it had no knowledge of the conference, an invitation-only circle of 24 attendees, which could have led to a breach of the government’s Prevent regulations on campus extremism.

    “UCL is investigating a potential breach of its room bookings process for events,” a spokesperson said.

    “Our records indicate the university was not informed in advance about the speakers and content of the conference series, as it should have been for the event to be allowed to go ahead.”...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197

    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.

    That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
    Should have written it on a bus.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 11,016
    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    Are the extra 11% all over 65 ?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,236
    So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.

    Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.

    Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,106
    edited January 11
    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    Not surprising that the tax fewer people pay has more support for being raised.
  • Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.

    That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
    Should have written it on a bus.
    It was a serious question - do you have any idea how much tax rates need to rise for tge 33 billion annual increase
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,040

    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.

    That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
    A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.
  • So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.

    Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.

    Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?

    You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honest
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,816
    Jonathan said:

    This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.

    Toby Young is a chum of the Johnsons. What more is needed?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,488

    So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.

    Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.

    Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?

    It is odd. It is very, very difficult to derive the idea that God hates queers from anything in the NT, unless you start off with an absolute determination to find it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,749
    edited January 11

    German economy posts strongest growth for 6 years at 2.2% in 2017.

    Yesterday it was suggested we had grown by 0.6% last quarter, so that is equal to 2.4% annual increase
    2017 growth will be in the region of 1.8-2.0% once all of the revisions are done. The "slowdown" the UK economy experienced will end up being as fictitious as the double dip recession was. I just want to see how the remainers will spin ~1.9% as poor and Germany's 2.2% as the boom of the ages.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,276
    John_M said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:

    May -6
    Corbyn -6
    Blair -42
    Clegg -24 (the next worst)
    Carney +10 - the only positive.

    Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?

    Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.
    Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
    Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
    Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
    God no.
    And yet he knocked it out of the park.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,798

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:

    53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS

    https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129

    This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.

    That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
    Should have written it on a bus.
    It was a serious question - do you have any idea how much tax rates need to rise for tge 33 billion annual increase
    Morning all,

    A 1p raise in income tax raises about £4.5 billion.
This discussion has been closed.