Penguin68

Unfortunately sales of new SUVs now outnumber electric vehicle sales at a rate of 37 to 1. 1. SUVs have replaced things like people carriers and other large saloons and estate cars - so their sales need to be understood as displacement of many other types of vehicle. SUVs are seen as being safer (better driving position and visibility) and, well, sexier. Most marques now offer SUVs - many are good value and - where they are petrol cars - not that polluting. 2. There are electric SUVs (I can't wait for the all electric Hummer EV SUV to be launched next year - it will cause such apoplexy in so many of the righteous)

In general the vaccine sites try to match 2nd with 1st vaccines - so if they don't have 'your' vaccine for the second shot they will call you back. Under 40s are generally not being offered AZ at the moment - and if you are under 40 you could refuse this if offered and wait for another. However, the incidence of blood clotting, if actually related, is very low - your chances of blood clots from Covid-19 - should you catch it and need to be hospitalised - are higher than the vaccine danger.

The 'illness' can be physical (often do do with respiration) or psychological (fear of being suffocated etc.) Either makes the suffers lives very difficult - but not wearing a mask when you have to be out (for instance going to work or shopping for food or visiting the doctor) is one thing - but I do think that for discretionary activity - such as going to bars - one ought, if only for your own health's sake - not go, if you cannot or will not shield yourself or others. Many I know who do have mask problems wear a clear plastic shield, which is better than nothing and can often avoid the adverse symptoms that mask wearing can induce. It's really not nice to have to wear a mask - but to crow over those who do have to (bar staff) - is not pleasant. Even if genuinely exempt.

I don't think people in bars do have to wear a mask once they are seated and eating and drinking - only when they arrive/ leave, leave their seat to go to the loo etc. Having said that, most people actually aren't exempt

True self-insurance only costs in when your fleet is so large that it would be good business on its own to an insurer - BT with at one time the largest commercial fleet in Europe self insured. Just insuring 3rd party means that (a) damage to your own fleet isn't covered and (b) does not then stop 3rd parties making full claims which must be met if proven. Unless your own fleet is very elderly (or its costs fully written down) this is unlikely to be a good option.

There has been land movement (the area has been prone to water logging, which will certainly have made some stones unstable). The cemetery staff tip them over, if it seems possible they might fall spontaneously, as a safety measure. Some have been re-settled, but that can be an expensive job. Probably some vandalism as well, of course.

You'd rather live next to a police station (neenaws and coming/going 24 hours) Sadly it was not a 24 hour station at the end - not I think (happy to stand corrected) since the stables for police horses there were closed and moved, I think, to Blackheath or Lewisham.

Blurred vision, rash, vomiting.... This is from an article which is warning about the symptoms involved with the (very unlikely) incidence of a blood clot forming - and most people suffer very few if any side effects from any of the Covid-19 vaccines - the most common is the 'day before catching flu' feeling (which may include a headache) and which persists for 4-12 hours. And tenderness at the site of the injection (which is a needle shoved into a muscle, so hardly surprising). Yes, there are, for a very few people, side effects which are worrying and which can portend a dangerous blood clot reaction (which in most cases, where caught early, is wholly treatable). It should be remembered that blood clots are common (and very dangerous) in those badly effected by Covid-19. It is not clear why those who suffer clots from the vaccine (one in a million to 5 in a million depending on vaccine and cohort) - it may be that they are also more susceptible to blood clotting if they catch Covid-19. The numbers are too small to offer any epidemiological guidance.

It doesn't seem to fall into any of the obvious hate-speech categories (no legislation against disliking Masons), nor does it incite violence (just stupidity). So you have no legal remedy against it, in my view. It turns out lying (except in a court of law, under oath) isn't a crime. Can't think why politicians haven't thought of making it one! Amended to say that there could be a possible suit for defamation (civil issue) if the Masons bothered. Burden of proof might be problematical however (that's the thing about conspiracy theories, demonstrating that they are in error)

if a suburban park like Peckham Rye or Dulwich Park is a natural habitat for rats, and they do need harm in being there, why does the council have traps out for them? Rats have a very poor reputation (sewer rats in particular) for hygiene - hence councils try to eradicate them even where they are actually simply 'wild-life' and probably doing no harm - although, having said that, they will take eggs from ground nesting birds - which means water fowl in many parks. Councils will be blamed by the public if they are seen not to discourage rats in public places. So, easier all round to set traps.

The metropolitan area of Copenhagen has a population of 2m - Greater London 9.3m. and the 'larger Urban zone' (EU Definition) 11.9m. London occupies 1,579 sq Km., Copenhagen 88.25 sq Kms. The highest elevation in Copenhagen is 91m. London has 21 hills over 100m, and the highest (Bromley) is 245 metres. Many of the highest hills (but not all) are broadly local to us. If you have been to Copenhagen you will know they have many broad streets making the creation of safe cycling lanes relatively easy and not making a major impact on other road users. I am fed up with people using cycling in Copenhagen (or indeed Amsterdam) as a template for what we could be doing in London. The distances, the heights, the traffic density are all very different.

Were you Pfizer? I believe deliveries of this have been patchy recently. For those awaiting first vaccine calls, a postponement of a particular 2nd vaccine may have no impact on the timing of your first, if it is a brand supply issue.

I think (a guess, I don't know for sure) that Tessa Jowell is conserving its Pfizer for 2nd vaccinations mainly, until it has cleared those due. So probably mainly doing new AZ.

one diesel powered bus emits more pollutants than one diesel powered car, try comparing how that looks when you compare emissions per mile travelled per person (1) - Most buses (all buses?) no longer travel full, or even half full often, because of Covid Restrictions. [This is relevant because the restrictions were brought in (partly as) a response to Covid.] (2) - Buses travel for (I'm guessing, of course) 15 to 18 hours a day in continuous use (as do many commercial vehicles) - private cars far less than that - and many private cars are petrol not diesel (and quite a few now fully electric or hybrid). You need to consider here not passenger miles but vehicle miles when looking at what's polluting London. Most people in London will use public transport where they can (because it's easier) but private vehicles where they can't/ where the time taken for a journey is very different. We are comparatively poorly served, for an 'inner' London borough by public transport (that's on record).

does anyone know the effects of unavoidably delayed 2nd vaccination? First injection AZ seems to have a long shelf life, getting 'better' over months - locally they are aiming for 11 weeks, although 12 is set as a national standard and some suggest longer would still be OK. I think the Pfizer effect doesn't get much better over time - after the initial 2-3 weeks - (but neither does the effect seem to dissipate that quickly). Take advice, if you can get it, from your GP - but don't over worry - I doubt if 2 or 3 weeks over your original date will make that much difference.

Stop driving = Save lives Although around half of the pollutants generated in London (although much pollution in London comes from outside London) come from vehicles - this is primarily diesel vehicles (NOx) - so significantly public and commercial transport, not domestic vehicles (the most polluting of which are being excluded by tariffs on them). It is domestic vehicles which are the targets of LTNs however, as are all the main actions of Southwark. If you are to quote the 9000 deaths associated with pollution these are not (mainly) to be laid at the doors of private vehicle owners - but rather those running diesel buses, trains and commercial vehicles - which achieve the most significant daily mileage (many private vehicles kept in ED are mainly weekend use, or for very short trips, generally, in my experience).

For information, whilst clearly there will be outliers where the effects are much more severe, here is the current NHS Guidance on AZ vaccine side effects, including a list of ingredients should you have an allergy to any. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca/information-for-uk-recipients-on-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca [And nobody is accusing anyone of 'lying' about what they themselves are going through, although the mechanisms which underlie the problems may be a matter of interpretation.] The problems you may suffer from catching Covid-19 can be very much greater than the problems associated with vaccine side effects.

I cannot see the mechanism where an anti viral innoculation can precipitate a novel yeast infection in under a day. It must have been existant and hidden and the vaccine knocked out your own previous defence mechanism from masking it. If a blood relative suffered similarly then you may have a genetic predisposition which let's the vaccine weaken your defences in this way.

What does your doctor say? Have you reported these? These side effects are very extreme and I believe pretty unusual. Certainly in lasting so long. And remarkably rapid in their onset for some, i.e. thrush.

Probably moved because this isn't the right thread. There isn't one really for product recommendations as these aren't local or specific to Dulwich (unlike recommendations for traders etc.) You could try The Lounge, or The Family Room

There is queuing traffic on Underhill outside my house right now.

But it is interesting to note that Forest Hill Road no longer seems to operate as a working surgery - both recent posts say they were referred to Tessa Jowell - presumably SELDOC or its successor. I only physically entered the surgery once these last 12 months, to get a flu jab from a nurse when I was rushed through - otherwise it's queuing in the rain to wait for a claw to hand out a form or receive back a sample. Do they still actually have doctors there at all, or is at all nurses and other (non medical) staff referring out to practices which still seem to be working? There are precious few active cases of Covid-19 now in Southwark (according to the figures) - what are they still frightened of that they treat us like medieval lepers? The tiny crack they open the surgery door to, when forced, is a leper's squint if ever I saw one? But in their case it is the rest of the world which is the leprosarium.

Journeys today, Underhill Road reasonably quiet at 8.30, the usual suspects doing 40mph, Funnily I was driving in Underhill then (I live on that road) - there was heavy traffic around the cemetery (where there are road works lights) and very heavy traffic turning into Underhill from Langton Rise (which has been single track because of Thames Water for the last 6 months and more). No one was doing 40 (it simply isn't possible) - most weren't achieving the legal 20. There was quite high levels of congestion through much of the road (some stretches were clear). Throughout my journey almost no cars were passing each other when they met (i.e. if cars were parked on both sides only one vehicle had room to continue)- one would have to hold back in a passing space so others could continue. And standing traffic outside my house (but particularly in the evening rush) is commonplace. Part of that at least is road works of course.

Maybe they might cross Lordship Lane safely (assuming they are on the road and want to cross over to, e.g. enter a side street) by properly signalling a turn? When I was a child, and cycled, my parents refused to allow me on the public road until I could demonstrate that I could cycle with one hand whilst signalling a turn with the other. Granted there was less traffic in those days, but in towns it went at 30 mph (and there was less other traffic to impede it). I rarely see cyclists hand signal now (if I do it tends to be by people in my baby-boomer generation. The traffic in Lordship Lane is (1) generally slow - most people do stick to the 20mph limit - if only because the weight of traffic forces them to, and (2) there are numbers of stop points (all the crossings and lights) to slow traffic further. I can hardly think of a safer place for cyclists who can (and will) signal their intentions to manoeuvre. But they have to be competent cyclists, well trained. In my day that included school children, who regularly cycled to school. The Green Cross code was about (generally) younger children crossing roads - it assumed that children who were cyclists would be able to cycle on public streets because they had trained to be able to do so, first gaining cycling skills and then road usage skills.

Yeah but if you're going to have a target of net zero for the borough Many years ago Greenwich proudly announced it was a nuclear-free borough. This was grandstanding (as is the above) as it believed, like all the boroughs in London (and indeed any major conurbation in the UK, I believe) that nuclear power stations were always placed on the periphery of the country. In fact, Greenwich had a nuclear power plant (a working submarine nuclear engine in the Queen Mary Building (or King William, I can't remember) of what was then the Old Royal Naval College (now Greenwich University) to train engineers on nuclear subs. So, far from being 'nuclear free', Greenwich was in fact the only 'nuclear' London Borough. Councils can boast and bluster, but actual delivery which they can control is the only real issue. Greenwich could not control the Armed Services, Southwark can influence, itself, only fraction of the contributors to climate change. To pretend otherwise is simple vanity.