ianr

That's ok. I've lots of experience of knowing what not to trust, as well as being a Lidl customer. While checking I did come across this awful example, of people who possibly think they can make money by setting up a portal to online delivery sites. https://www.buyonlinegroceries.co.uk/. They appear to have got Iceland to sign up and presumably give them some click-through commission. But dig down and that appears to be all. Iceland appears on their top page. But click on any of the other supermarkets listed and you get some near-contentless spiel and a link to Iceland. They even have a similar page prepared for Lidl. https://www.buyonlinegroceries.co.uk/lidl. It's actually so bizarre, when you get down to the area-specific parts, you can start wondering what it's really for. A school exercise ground? An eventual repository for a string of paid SEO backlinks? ...

Not if you believe the only authoritative source, the lidl.co.uk website. We do not offer any home delivery or click and collect services, we also do not have a stock checking system online or at Customer Services. https://customer-service.lidl.co.uk/SelfServiceUK/s/article/How-to-purchase-goods-at-Lidl?language=en_GB

Sephiroth> It?s nuts that people are giving any credence to this nonsense conspiracy bullshit ---------- JohnL> It took me a while to see it when I saw Pestons post ----------

> BTW Does anyone know if there is a maximum > word count on here, if there is I will > need to do each chapter in several boxes, > if that makes sense. I think you should be asking the forum owner/admin about publication here.

> waiting for Nigello to get to > the punchline of this Marathon If he's still with us. I've heard at least one whodunit in the past year where the poison was in the chocolates.

That must have been quite vexing. I'm wondering why the surge in numbers, whether it was just in response to the need speed things up to help meet the government deadline, or maybe tied up in any way with the vaccine life cycle. Iirc, they have only about five days of usage after dilution. And the batch size is in the 995-1200 doses range.

Robbie wrote: > According to the PHE publication that > I linked, it plateaus at 28 cycles. What does "it" mean here? Where do you think a sample with a Ct of, say, 30, plateaus? And, in the OP: > Given that the recommendation for PCR Test > Cycles to be at 25-30 cycles in order to What do you mean by "PCR Test Cycles" being "at 25-30 cycles". And later: > A public forum to spread awareness and > encourage debate is the perfect platform > for the local community. > maintain accuracy and a reliable result, So can you please point us to the websites where you got (a) your information about the King's FOI requests; (b) the recommendation I've just quoted; and © the information that "In Oxfordshire, the number of cycles on average used in the 21-30 age group was just over 58."

Next showing live 27 January 16:45-17:00 - Bankside, East Dulwich, according to Digiguide (which is not infallible) Brixton, Bermondsey, Crystal Palace, Elephant ... all feature in other episodes.

At least give Jack Wallington some credit, even if you're not going to respect his copyright. https://www.jackwallington.com/17-reasons-to-avoid-fake-lawns-how-bad-is-artificial-grass-for-the-environment/ PS I've just seen you have, in the first post.

My vaccination at St Thomas's, arranged and done yesterday, was definitely the Pfizer vaccine. ETA: I didn't know in advance and was quite happy to take pot luck, on the basis that (a) there wasn't a huge difference between the reported efficacies; (b) no-one's likely to know of any definite differences, in any particular, until we have accumulated oodles of vaccination outcome data; © there's always scope for future rectification, if needed; (d) my main worry is avoiding permanent organ damage or long covid, and I'm trusting that both the available vaccines, even a single dose, will substantially reduce that risk.

Kid Kruger wrote yesterday at 22:45: ----------------------------------_ > I heard on LBC yesterday that %72 of > BAME citizens in UK would refuse to > take the Covid vaccine I recommend a look at the abstract of the paper from which this snippet was derived, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.27.20248899v1.full-text. I'm also attaching three of its data representation figures (as licensed by https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).

> They seem to be taking 70+ They are. Managed to get though to them today at 2.20 to ask, and got a 3.45 appointment at St Thomas's. The queueing time was only half an hour, and all well organised. Wahey.

The news story that turned up two days ago on the BBC News and Guardian pages and elswhere was based on an RM daily update that changes from day to day: https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/12556/~/service-update

Was this thread's removal to the lounge due to the "Steven Taylor" incursion, or did it happen before?

Got through today, to my surprise, after numerous tries over two days, and was told that their qualifying age is actually 75. I guess thay might have revised their previous policy as being over-inclusive. But thanks for the info Pp. But it would still be useful to know when they drop down to treating the over-70s. They might even then be ahead of local facilities in appointment availability. And they might still be using the Pfizer vaccine, which I'm quite interested in trying, while smaller venues will most probably be using the vaccines that are easier to handle.

If you've viewed them there might still be copies in your browser's cache, depending on the cache size and the amount of throughput since they were last cached. In some cases, with some moderately knowledgeable work, and maybe purchase of software, the individual files might then be retrievable from the cache. As to backups on the EDF server, that's obviously Admin's province.

HamletHarrier wrote at 01:40 today: ---------------------------------- > One change is that the updated Regs for > this lockdown require people who are > challenged by the Police to provide > evidence of exemption in order to avoid > a fine But where in the Regs is this? I've not been aware of it and can't find anything new. The gov.uk advice page explicitly says otherwise:However, some people may feel more comfortable showing something that says they do not have to wear a face covering. This could be in the form of an exemption card, badge or even a home-made sign. Carrying an exemption card or badge is a personal choice and is not required by law. ( https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own#exemptions ) And those of the other UK legislations all say something similar. It's open to an officer to question the person, of course, and to exercise his judgment accordingly before issuing any FPN. Even the presentation of an 'exemption card' needn't necessarily be regarded as conclusive.

Thanks. But what's actually on offer? If their aim is solely waste-avoidance I'd expect, or at least hope, the availability of jabs to be sporadic and somewhat unpredictable. So do they say they'll call you if you can turn up at an hour's notice, or something like that? Or "Turn up any time today", or "Sorry, nothing doing today; try again some other time"? Or give you an appointment regardlesss? Or ...?

It would be very helpful if someone who gets through to this number can report back here on what they say.

My presumption would be that it was Lambeth council that was providing the Lambeth tests. When they do arrive, bear in mind that the lateral flow tests have a false negative rate of about 50%, so don't assume it'll be definitive of your own status. But it's still believed to be potentially beneficial, given the isolation and tracing opportunities provided by those positives that are found. A BMJ blog is less optimistic: "Rapid testing of asymptomatic people could be useful if the test detected people who were asymptomatic and actively infectious, and if those people went on to self-isolate and if their contacts were traced. However, in practice, only a subset of people testing positive with the Innova test are actively infectious and only a subset self-isolate." https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/12/covid-19-government-must-urgently-rethink-lateral-flow-test-roll-out/

How many road parking spaces for its vans did the Silvester Road delivery office need?

The link merely confirms that there is a Penguin book called Spot goes to the beach. It shows the cover illustration of a dog and a penguin with their surfboards. I doubt it contains anything at all in the scatological department.

From news reports it seems that at least Sainsbury and Tesco will be following Morrison's lead. This for example from Sky: "Sainsbury's said it would put trained security guards at store entrances to challenge those not wearing a mask and those who were shopping in groups."

> FYI - "Oops, this page doesn't exist" https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/borough-market-forces-shoppers-to-wear-masks-outside-under-obscure-1829-law/

I see that "From Monday, children will be provided with three hours worth of primary school lessons every weekday on CBBC and at least two hours for secondary school pupils on BBC Two." https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/55552432?collection=cbbc-top-picks-today That's from 9-12. Schedules at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl9r/ If there are any households having difficulty in getting any school-produced work msaterial, I guess there'd be folk here willing to help with printing and/or distribution.