716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Nov 2, 2023 23:58:12 GMT
I thought this was brilliant last night. Having seen it (and thoroughly loved it) at the Almeida, it was so great to see this again. The pro-shot itself has been really well recorded and really honed in on some of the more subtle acting choices that I missed during the actual production
I really hope this is viewable more widely sometime soon. Here's to hoping this adaptation ends up back on the stage at some point too.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Oct 6, 2023 20:49:35 GMT
Sold out at Curzon Bloomsbury, almost sold out at Mayfair. When do Everyman tickets go on sale? Didn't receive any notice from Almeida. Seem to be plenty of seats available at both when I booked just now
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Feb 27, 2022 22:55:28 GMT
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Feb 22, 2022 0:30:25 GMT
Why would you not be as willing now to have another dose of something you've already had? That makes no sense whatsoever. Because I can’t think of another vaccine that requires you to have 4 doses in such a short period of time. At what point do you cross the line between preventing disease and putting yourself at risk of overdosing on the medicine? Overdosing?!?
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 19, 2022 20:02:05 GMT
I know the English are often accused of exceptionalism, but why is there still this belief that soggy pieces of cloth make the slightest difference in this country, when they clearly haven't elsewhere? Perhaps if France eased off on the restrictions, its cases would fall too. Here's a peer reviewed paper, published in Nature, one of the most highly respected scientific journals, that looks at the efficacy of different masks: www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7Whilst the evidence of home made, cloth masks is less conclusive, it still demostrates they are likely to be more effective than not wearing a mask. It's very clear that both surgical masks and the higher grade N95 (FFP2/3) masks are highly effective at reducing droplets and aerosols. In summary, masks are an effective tool in the reduction of transmission in respiratory diseases
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 19, 2022 15:43:58 GMT
They are at the moment unless I have a wild imagination Well... yes, because its mandatory. If the public wanted to wear masks, theyd do so without the rules being in place Presume you're comparing this to pre-pandemic right? If so, that's a slightly odd comparison to make 🤔
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 19, 2022 15:39:11 GMT
Where do you get the idea that the 'majority' of the public don't want to wear masks? I can't find anything that suggests this Well, whats the mask wearing coverage when it isnt mandatory? If the majority of public want to wear masks, they'd be doing so They are at the moment unless I have a wild imagination. You're aware a majority means >50% right
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 19, 2022 15:18:03 GMT
Wonder what lies will be peddled at PMQs today. He’s going to come out navy, fighting and very defensive against the op today. Like a little yappy dog that’s just sh*t on your doorstep and barking at you about it. Well this was certainly an accurate prediction It all seemed to be going so well for him until David Davis appeared at the end
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 19, 2022 15:16:36 GMT
Sorry but I disagree vehemently with that. If this pandemic has taught us anything, it's that the public by answering large appears selfish. Mandates had to be introduced precisely because people wouldn't comply voluntarily. I appreciate that some are genuinely exempt but the vast majority aren't. Their selfishness puts everybody at risk. Well, you're a member of the public as well. If a majority of the public don't want to wear masks voluntarily, you can shout at them about it but its not going to change much I also disagree about the public being selfish over the last 2 years, just because a majority aren't doing what YOU want them to do Where do you get the idea that the 'majority' of the public don't want to wear masks? I can't find anything that suggests this
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 17, 2022 23:55:22 GMT
If mask wearing was limited to when you are feeling ill, I thought it was be adhered to lot more. Although that wouldn't be very effective since a large percentage of people carrying (and transmitting) the virus have no symptoms, especially those vaccinated. One thing that's definitely interesting over here is the lack of focus on specific mask types. In most European countries there is regulation around this and in Canada for example there is super clear guidance The science on this is super clear when it comes to N95 (FFP2) v Surgical v Cloth and could really be helpful for more vulnerable people. There's still too much of a focus on hand washing and airborne droplets from coughs etc when in reality most transmission is through aerosol meaning a well fitted, filtering mask makes considerable difference .Whether this has been ignored due to the fact the government hasn't adequately provided NHS staff with appropriate PPE I have no idea but it seems a simple step to at least advise people on the effectiveness of different face coverings to give them a choice.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 16, 2022 9:43:08 GMT
... 200-300 flu deaths per day + 200-300 covid deaths per day = 400-600. Covid doesn't make flu dissappear. Which models are you referring to? There are many different scenarios modelled You can’t die twice. If you read the article it says that the vast majority of people who are likely to die from Covid are the same as those likely to die from flu. Same number of people dying just some of covid now and some of flu. This isn't strictly true. Whilst there is definitely some overlap, especially in the most vulnerable groups, covid is a very different disease to flu: There's some very good info here making the comparisons: www.health.org.uk/publications/long-reads/one-year-on-three-myths-about-COVID-19-that-the-data-proved-wrongIn short we'd expect to see much higher winter death rates with the coexistence of both flu and covid if we do nothing. The hope is really that either we see further improvements in antivirals or other therapeutics, combined with vaccines that work against multiple (and future) strains
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 15, 2022 18:24:08 GMT
We need to remember that reported covid death figures are those dying with covid, not from covid, something we'll never really be able to differentiate between. This difference is negligible and completely outweighed by those that die > 28 days after +ve test and also those that aren't recorded as covid. This argument has been disproved several times over
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 15, 2022 17:49:42 GMT
... 200-300 flu deaths per day + 200-300 covid deaths per day = 400-600. Covid doesn't make flu dissappear. Which models are you referring to? There are many different scenarios modelled Is that the current rate of flu deaths? Are you saying we need to stop flu deaths now? The 600-6000 clvud deaths a day models SAGE said I mean yes... one aim of modern medicine is to reduce excess deaths, they aren't just an accepted statistic... SAGE don't do the modelling, they pull lots of research from different organisations and make recomendations based upon this. 'SAGE' has seemingly becoming a blanket term for all science There were some high death rates modelled in these but these were only worst case scenarios (ie low booster uptake etc. as they were produced prior to the ramp up of the booster programme)
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 15, 2022 17:35:45 GMT
So by that you mean you'd accept 400-600+ deaths a day then? Aside from this, COVID is an entirely different illness to flu. You can't treat it exactly the same. As much as comparisons are continuously made, they aren't particularly helpful, you've seen quite clearly that even with plan B measures in place we are exceeding these flu figures. It's like comparing a ford to a ferrari. Covid really needs to be looked at differently, its pretty naive from a media perspective to compare the two viruses, just because they're well, viruses... We aren't on 4-600 deaths a day though. The 7 day average is around 2-300 a day. The models (surprise surprise) are wrong. Cases are dropping massively now, 50% less than this time last week. ... 200-300 flu deaths per day + 200-300 covid deaths per day = 400-600. Covid doesn't make flu dissappear. Which models are you referring to? There are many different scenarios modelled
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 15, 2022 17:08:01 GMT
“In a bad flu season, 200-300 die a day over winter and nobody wears a mask or socially distances, that's perhaps that’s a right line to draw in the sand." Good article. www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59970281So by that you mean you'd accept 400-600+ deaths a day then? Aside from this, COVID is an entirely different illness to flu. You can't treat it exactly the same. As much as comparisons are continuously made, they aren't particularly helpful, you've seen quite clearly that even with plan B measures in place we are exceeding these flu figures. It's like comparing a ford to a ferrari. Covid really needs to be looked at differently, its pretty naive from a media perspective to compare the two viruses, just because they're well, viruses...
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 13, 2022 16:40:41 GMT
Massive drop in cases for England, almost 36% WoW by reporting date and that's with a fair bit of reporting lag catch up as well. Hospitalisations are going down as well, and MV beds are staying static. Looking like not putting restrictions in was the right call, as the situation in Scotland an Wales doesnt seem massively different to wha happened in England Id be very surprised if Plan B is in place past the rveiew date of Jan 26th I'd take this with a bit of a pinch of salt, especially with the shift to lateral flow only testing for asymptomatic cases. Although positive LFTs are counted in the daily numbers, this is only if people self report, so a drop in cases was semi-expected with this. Not saying this is this only component though
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 13, 2022 16:25:19 GMT
Quite convenient this happens the day after the PM has been caught with his trousers down. If there's anything that demonstrates the motive for these changes then this is it. A scramble to find a new headline. I'm honestly not sure what 'science' they've been looking at for this one as pretty much everything out there suggests this is a pretty risky move, even with Lateral Flow Tests Intriguing that the PM himself has now decided to 'Self Isolate' for a week contrary to his own guidance, especially given how keen he has been to avoid self isolation in the past. Given that this is theatreboard, I think we can quite liken his position to a song in certain show playing at the Almeida at the moment
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 12, 2022 9:26:02 GMT
Times reporting that the UK will be reducing the isolation period from 7 to 5 days (after 2 negative LFTs.). Due to be signed off on Thursday Presumably this is to divert attention from the parties then... The science suggests this is incredibly risky, even with LFT testing. Following the science... Johnson Style
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 11, 2022 0:03:34 GMT
Lol they say it's based on the data they are getting.... 'they' being an unamed official, that could be absolutely anyone There is obviously talk over when things will be relaxed, as expected and has been a key discussion point for some weeks now. I wouldn't take the '26th Jan' from a complete unknown as anything near certainty. Put simply, its no more than a rumour
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 9, 2022 15:41:24 GMT
Apparently the Government are ending free LFTs? What do they think living with the virus looks like then? Probably like living with Flu. We don't regularly test ourselves for it and don't isolate when we have it. Are we talking flu or cold here though? Actual 'Flu' (influenza) isn't something that you'd be carrying on your day to day life with normally I don't think. It's also not as transmissible really so I imagine that's why we don't test for it
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 6, 2022 18:10:16 GMT
Saw this last night and I was really impressed. I'll start by saying that the 'restricted view' seats are great (I sat right at the back of the circle in row E and I didn't miss anything)
This was the second time that I've seen Spring Awakening, the first. being an amateur production in Sheffield a few years back when I was studying there. The casting, I felt was great, especially for Moritz, Wendla and Melchior. All brought their own to. the production and I loved the fact that the cast were all using their own accents for this. I also really liked the portrayal of the adults in this and how well each character was differentiated from the next, with many productions often just altering an item of clothing. Staging wise I thought this was really interesting, especially the use of the mirrors and the projections.
I was a bit unsure about the new version of Totally F*****d. It's one of my favourite pieces in the show and was full of energy but the ending left me a bit flat. I've always seen this as the 'rock concert' number and it was a shame the very end of it didn't feel this way for me. I'm sure other people would love this alternative ending though.
The new song, 'There Once Was a Pirate' I thought was nice but I can understand why it was cut from the original production as I wasn't quite sure how it fitted in with the story. Nonetheless, it was performed well by the cast and it was nice to see something you don't see in other productions.
Overall I thought this was a great production that has been really well imagined and is very original in its portrayal. I'd love to see this do a short run in a smaller west end theatre.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 6, 2022 16:09:14 GMT
This Twitter bot should help: twitter.com/LFT_alertSeems that they become available at pretty much the same times every day
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 2, 2022 22:03:29 GMT
Seeing this on Wednesday. Quick question to anyone that's been, what accent is the show delivered in? I've seen a few amateur productions over the years that have been delivered with an American accent but more recent professional productions have used UK regional/RP accents
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 1, 2022 13:51:44 GMT
I take it you've had a look back at some of this guys bizarre, verging on conspiracy theories right? He's right though As someone whos posted Eric Ding , the phrase 'those in glass houses' comes to mind That was in reference to a paper he'd linked, completely unrelated to him. It's bizarre to say that he's right when there are so many other measures that could be taken (avoiding lockdown). Having no tests available whilst telling people to keep on testing springs to mind I can try my best explain things to you but I can't help you understand them...
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 1, 2022 13:12:46 GMT
I take it you've had a look back at some of this guys bizarre, verging on conspiracy theories right?
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Jan 1, 2022 0:57:02 GMT
Fantastic to see Whitty and JVT on this list. Both have worked immensely hard over the past 2 years and have levels of integrity mountains above the government they are advising
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 31, 2021 15:55:20 GMT
So this is showing greater severity than the original 80% reduction that was published using the SA data then. Also important to note than may people wont be >14 days since booster dose just yet. The second point on here is positive, yes but I thought we already knew this from previous data. We also know this begins to wane after about 10 weeks (impact on severe disease as part of this is unknown as of yet but is likely to be reduced too)
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 30, 2021 19:37:16 GMT
I'm not sure what you mean by "the numbers are clearly out". If it was that obviously wrong, I doubt the team behind it would have published it as to risk damaging their reputation within the scientific community If you look at the current, most likely scenario (80% severity) the hospitalisation rates, at present appear to actually be exceeding this. As I've said before, even if we aren't able to impact the overall number of hospitalisations (area under the curve), flattening that curve slightly, or as can be seen in one of the examples there, having 2 smaller peaks, allows the health service to cope. At the moment, the only positive we can take out of this is that fewer patients are needing mechanical ventilation, however the rate of transmission is meaning that there are huge numbers of people requiring intermediate hospital care. If this continues, then we're in the situation we were in last year whereby routine procedures and outpatient appointments start being cancelled as there is no way to provide the staff for them. We aren't getting 5000 hospitlisations a day and 500 deaths a day by Sunday I tried to explain this in my last post but this isn't the right part of the report to be looking at. When modelling scenarios, you model a wide range of scenarios from the best case scenario to the worst case scenario. This is so that when the paper eventually reaches those deciding upon policy, they can best match the current scenario to one of the models. If for example a paper only gave a single model, the paper would quickly become irrelevant if one parameter changed. By modelling several scenarios, if the science, for example of disease severity begins to indicate something different, we can easily look at one of the either reduced or increased severity models. This is an annotated version of the report from Prof Christina Pagel, which highlights the section we should really be looking at based upon what we currently know about disease severity:
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 30, 2021 19:05:53 GMT
Hmmmm that Warwick paper looks ridiculous to me Whilst the numbers are clearly out, what it does show is bringing in restrictions now make v little difference Also step 1 (basically lockdown) brings about a similar peak, just later when there’s potential waning etc. So I think the UK will have to tough it out I'm not sure what you mean by "the numbers are clearly out". If it was that obviously wrong, I doubt the team behind it would have published it as to risk damaging their reputation within the scientific community If you look at the current, most likely scenario (80% severity) the hospitalisation rates, at present appear to actually be exceeding this. As I've said before, even if we aren't able to impact the overall number of hospitalisations (area under the curve), flattening that curve slightly, or as can be seen in one of the examples there, having 2 smaller peaks, allows the health service to cope. At the moment, the only positive we can take out of this is that fewer patients are needing mechanical ventilation, however the rate of transmission is meaning that there are huge numbers of people requiring intermediate hospital care. If this continues, then we're in the situation we were in last year whereby routine procedures and outpatient appointments start being cancelled as there is no way to provide the staff for them.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 30, 2021 18:27:04 GMT
Um what? I guess what's concerning here is that. hospital admission rates are already higher than that of the best case scenario, Plan B from this report. One thing to note though is that the image in the tweet above is looking at the 50% less severe scenario when we really want to be looking at the 80% less one. I'm really hoping that we don't see deaths start to follow what we're seeing in this paper but that should become clearer in the next few days I think, by paying close attention to the London data which is a few weeks ahead of everywhere else in the UK. This is a super clear explanation of the paper, with some useful annotations: /photo/1
|
|