thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--How To Maintain Your Work Friendships – Even At A Distance

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Those moments of giggling by the kettle, catching someone’s eye in a meeting, co-ordinating lunch breaks and offloading at the pub have gone. And without them, relationships with our colleagues have become purely professional.
That’s not necessarily a good thing.
Having at least one friend at work can boost both happiness and productivity in the workplace, according to research from LinkedIn, Gallup and Totaljobs.
Advertisement
“I think it helps us feel grounded and comfortable to know we have someone in our corner at work, which can sometimes (or often!) be a daunting environment that doesn’t always put our happiness first,” says Kate Leaver, author of The Friendship Cure: A Manifesto for Reconnecting in the Modern World.
“We are, after all, still human beings in the office and we crave things like support, comfort, camaraderie and even fun – all of which we’re more likely to get from a buddy than a boss.”
The moments that facilitate these friendships have been destroyed by the pandemic, though, as millions across the UK are still working from home. Many haven’t returned to the office since March, and industry experts have told HuffPost UK most companies aren’t planning to head back until spring.
It’s got us wondering, how can we maintain our work friendships – or even make new ones – while we continue to work remotely?
Advertisement
insta_photos via Getty Images
Don’t expect work relationships to be ‘normal’ – nothing else is
The first step is accepting your work friendships been tested this year. A feeling of distance or strain is almost inevitable, says Leaver, as our usual methods of communication have been disrupted.
“When the world was normal, anyone who worked in an office alongside colleagues communicated in a number of different ways: emails, Slack banter, boardroom meetings, brainstorms, kitchen sink gossip sessions,” she says.
“We had this mix of face-to-face and virtual communication, which meant we could get lovely eye contact and pheromones and even a surge of the bond-building hormone oxytocin from a casual handshake or high five.”
Advertisement
Taking away those physical interactions has been a shock to the system. We’ve had to adjust to being able to tell what our colleagues are feeling, needing and doing via video calls, instant messaging and email.
“It can be isolating and confusing for people who are used to a variety of communication modes to suddenly be limited to one,” she says.
“Sometimes it’s difficult to tell what someone’s tone or mood is from a text or email, which will cause strain. Add to that the fact we’re all living through a global pandemic, enduring whatever anxiety and dread and sadness that may bring, and it’s no wonder some people are struggling.”
Geber86 via Getty Images
Take a break from work chat
Working remotely risks making all our interactions with colleagues transactional: managers email to request a task, team members reply when it’s completed.
To break the cycle, we need to create moments in the day where work chat is banned, says Lee Thawley, co-founder of workplace consultancy MuddyWellies. “It’s a chance to, catch up or get to know each other and take your minds away from the stresses of the day,” she tells HuffPost.
Advertisement
“Just chat about anything but work… family, home life, exercise, the latest Netflix programme, whatever it takes to get a feel for how they’re doing. It doesn’t always have to be a planned Zoom call, just pick up the phone.”
If after nine months you’re struggling to find common ground, Thawley recommends “levelling up” your team meetings with some silliness, to get conversations started. This may also help new employees who’ve joined during the pandemic, who won’t have established work friendships.
“Add a theme that everyone needs to take part in,” she explains. “For example, you could organise a meeting with a James Bond theme. Everyone comes with something James Bond themed – either a fact, dressed as a character from the films, or even with a vodka martini, shaken not stirred!”
Bringing a little lightness back into your work relationships could really help, agrees Leaver – but you have to put the effort in. “The kind of thing that happens effortlessly and incidentally when you share a work space – you may just have to conscientiously make happen now.”
Advertisement
Bookend the day with informality
Spontaneity is great, but if you find you get too wrapped up in the working day once it’s started, you could consider making time for personal interactions at the beginning or end of your day.
Advertisement
“Someone I know has an ‘hour of power’ with his team every morning where each person gets five minutes uninterrupted to talk about themselves, then a big old debrief with everyone before they get on with the day,” says Leaver.
“Another friend of mine uses the time she’d usually be commuting to do an informal chat session with her work favourites, which is a sacred chance to gossip, bitch, laugh, joke, bond – and set the tone for the day ahead.”
Lucy Lambriex via Getty Images
Engage in an activity together
How often do we actually look at one another directly in the face IRL? Staring at your colleagues’ faces – or worse, staring at your own reflection – on video calls doesn’t necessarily make for the most relaxing or stimulating chat. Consider sharing an activity instead. “Think creatively, you could organise a virtual activity such as a Pilates session to get away from your desk or dining room table,” says Thawley. “Organising an activity rather than just a team meeting will get the team having fun, rather than just sitting and talking about the day-to-day stuff.”
Advertisement
Don’t skip the Christmas party
Yes, we’ve all got Zoom fatigue, but marking the festive season with colleagues can be a morale boost, says Thawley. It doesn’t need to take up a whole evening.
Advertisement
“In the run up to Christmas, think about how you can make your favourite parts of your usual festive celebrations work from home,” she says. “A team secret Santa is always a winner, with each team member having a gift delivered to a colleague at home. Log onto a Zoom call for the big reveal, and guess who bought each person the gift, all enjoyed with a glass of fizz, obviously.”
Think about your colleagues as individuals
Sure, you all work for the same company, but it’s unlikely your colleagues all have the same interests. Registering that will boost the chances of friendship.
“Listen to your colleagues’ passions, find out about them and then demonstrate that you know them,” says Thawley.
This could be as simple as recommending a show or a book you think they’ll like, or sending them something in the post. “Think about little moments of magic you can create for the team,” he adds.
Encourage a policy of openness
A policy of openness, and even vulnerability, helps strengthen friendships though difficult periods, says Leaver. If you feel comfortable, you can lead by example on this for your digital workplace.
Advertisement
“Sometimes you have to make up for the physical distance between you by ramping up your honesty, transparency and willingness to listen. So if you’re struggling or worried or scared, if it’s appropriate, say so,” she says.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--This Is How Long You Need Between The Flu Jab And Covid Vaccine

HuffPost is part of Verizon Media .
We and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through @ @ @ @ @ similar technologies , to display personalised ads and content , for ad and content measurement @ @ @ @ @ development .
Your personal data that may be used • Information about your device and @ @ @ @ @ IP address • Browsing and search activity while using Verizon Media websites and apps Find @ @ @ @ @ use your information in our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy .
To enable Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ your personal data select ' I agree ' , or select 'Manage settings ' for @ @ @ @ @ your choices .
You can change your choices at any time by visiting Your Privacy @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Every Monday, we’ll answer your questions on Covid-19 and health in a feature published online. You can submit a question here. This week, HuffPost UK reader Julia asked: “How long do I have to wait after having the flu vaccine to have the Covid vaccine?”
Most people prioritised for the Covid-19 vaccine will have already been called up to receive their flu vaccine – and should hopefully have had it.
Advertisement
But for those who’ve not yet had chance to get their flu jab, how long should they leave between having that vaccine and the Covid-19 vaccine, if they’re eligible for both?
Scheduling for the two jabs should ideally be separated by an interval of at least seven days, spokespeople from Public Health England (PHE) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) tell HuffPost UK.
This is because if you had both the vaccines in the space of a few days of each other – or at the same time – and then had an allergic reaction, it would be hard for doctors to tell which vaccine had caused the adverse effects.
“Because of the absence of data on co-administration with Covid-19 vaccines, it should not be routine to offer appointments to give this vaccine at the same time as other vaccines,” a PHE’s spokesperson says.
Advertisement
Marko Geber via Getty Images
Health chiefs have urged people with long-term medical conditions to get the flu vaccine before the virus properly starts to circulate. So far this year, just 46.8% of people with a long-term health condition and under the age of 65 have had the flu vaccine.
While vaccine coverage in this group is higher than it has been at this point compared to the last six flu seasons, it still lags behind coverage in other eligible groups. This year has seen the highest ever recorded flu vaccine uptake among older people, for example. With those most vulnerable to flu also being at high risk of severe illness from Covid-19, health professionals have said it’s more important than ever that eligible people get the free flu vaccine as soon as possible.
As it stands, because the vaccine is so new, we don’t really know how the Covid-19 vaccine and flu vaccine would interact with one another, as no data on co-administration of the Covid-19 vaccine with other vaccines exists. But in the absence of such data, it’s been suggested that interference between the flu and Covid-19 vaccines, which have different antigenic content (the content which causes your immune system to produce antibodies against an illness) is “likely to be limited”.
“Based on experience with other vaccines, any potential interference is most likely to result in a slightly attenuated [reduced] immune response to one of the vaccines,” says PHE’s spokesperson, before adding “there is no evidence of any safety concerns.”
Advertisement
If you can’t leave a space of seven days between having the two vaccines, where does that leave you? For now, PHE suggests that where individuals in an eligible cohort have received another vaccine, Covid-19 vaccination should still be considered.
The same applies for other vaccines where Covid-19 vaccination has been received first.
“In many cases, vaccination should proceed to avoid any further delay in protection and to avoid the risk of the patient not returning for a later appointment,” says PHE.
“In such circumstances, patients should be informed about the likely timing of potential adverse events relating to each vaccine.”
People do not have to have had a flu jab in order to have the Covid-19 vaccine.
Is there an order that works best to have both the vaccines in?
“There’s no preference on either vaccine first,” says a DHSC spokesperson, “but the current Covid vaccine rollout is obviously limited and by the time most people are offered the Covid-19 vaccine, they will likely have been offered the flu vaccine already.”
Experts are still learning about Covid-19. The information in this story is what was known or available at the time of publication, but guidance could change as scientists discover more about the virus. To keep up to date with health advice and cases in your area, visit gov.uk/coronavirus and nhs.uk.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--I Can’t Be With My Family At Christmas. So I’m Making My Own New Traditions

LOADING ERROR LOADING
This is how Christmas normally looks for me: I haul myself out of bed at about 5am on the 22 or 23 December and catch an early morning flight from London, where I live, to the west of Ireland. My mum picks me up from the airport, and on the way home we stop at a café – the same one every time – for a coffee and a mince pie and the kind of excitable catch-up that you can’t really have over the phone.
By Christmas Eve, my brother and sister are home too, and every surface in the sitting room is studded with bowls of Quality Street chocolates in their jewel-bright wrappers. We go to the pub, and by the time we’re back, the Father Ted Christmas special is on.
Advertisement
On Christmas Day, our grandparents call round for dinner, an elaborate affair that involves three kinds of stuffing, two choices for dessert and the obligatory cracker-hat wearing. Afterwards, my mum and I have a completely unnecessary Baileys coffee, and then we all attempt to play a board game before falling asleep on the sofa. And, of course, once the cabin fever sets in and the toffee pennies are the only Quality Street left, I start itching to get back to London again.
No one celebrating Christmas last year could have comprehended what the coming months would hold. None of us knew that this year’s celebrations would be very different. In 2020, for the first time, like so many others, I’m spending Christmas away from home. I’ll be in the flat in London I share with my boyfriend.
Though it was always going to be complicated – with 14 days of self-isolation required on arrival in Ireland, and an anxious cat we don’t want to bring on a plane – we had a plan. We were going to drive home via the ferry in mid-December, self-isolate in a friend’s empty house for two weeks and then get picked up by our respective families. Then, in November, someone stole our car – and, though they didn’t know it, our Christmas.
“We decided it’s just not worth putting the people we love at risk – my parents work in care homes, and the consequences of me giving Covid to either of them could be disastrous.”
Advertisement
Other ways of getting home would just be too complicated and risky. We decided it’s just not worth putting the people we love at risk – my parents work in care homes, and the consequences of me giving Covid to either of them could be disastrous.
Of course, I know that many, many people are in the same situation. I also know that far worse things have happened this year than a 28-year-old woman in a live-in relationship not getting to see her family at Christmas. And yet, it stings a little to think about all of those rituals – the bowls being filled with sweets, the giddy Christmas Eve pub trip – happening while I’m hundreds of miles away.
I moped for a couple of days, wondering how I could recreate Christmas as I knew it – before realising I couldn’t. There’s no way any of it could be the same. So I’ve decided to develop my own festive traditions for the first time.
It’s started already, with Christmas cards. I’ve never sent them before, but this year, with not much else to do, I decided to try making my own. The process was so lovely and therapeutic that I’ve already decided to make it a yearly ritual – getting all the bits in from Hobbycraft, lighting a festive candle, blasting Mariah Carey and spending a peaceful evening at the kitchen table, doodling and folding and sticking.
Baking has been my main way of dealing with the constant sense of impending doom that’s underpinned this year, so I’ve scoured the internet for mince pie recipes and tried to take all the most delicious-looking elements of each – spiced rum, ground almonds, orange zest – to develop my own. As I wrote it down on a piece of paper torn out of my notebook, in a massive delusion of grandeur, I imagined it being handed down to my grandchildren.
Advertisement
On the big day itself, we’re planning to go for a long walk in our favourite park to work up an appetite before dinner. We’re both vegetarian, and so for the first time we can cook a big plant-based Christmas dinner, rather than picking at a stuffed mushroom from Tesco while everyone else tears into the turkey. We’ve bought all the things we need to make cocktails, so that post-dinner Baileys coffee is going to become a Baileys espresso martini this year.
“If we’ve learned anything this year, it’s that we can’t ever count on things staying the same.”
Since I moved to London six years ago, friends and family have always asked whether or not I’d be coming home for Christmas, and I’ve never understood why it was even a question. Until now, the thought of spending Christmas away from home seemed crazy – it always felt like something only a real, established adult would do. Someone who owns a house, has children, knows what their tax code means.
But starting my own festive traditions – knowing I can ‘do’ Christmas – has given me a sense of confidence. I’ve realised that I am a real, established adult, who can adapt when things go wrong, who doesn’t melt into a puddle like brandy butter on a Christmas pudding when a deadly virus scuppers her plans.
I’ll probably feel a little sad when I wake up on Christmas morning, but there’ll be comfort in these new rituals that we’ve developed, and that we’ll hopefully carry into the future. Traditions, I’ve realised, are what makes Christmas so special – there’s so much joy to be found in the things that stay the same every year, no matter what else is going on in our lives.
Advertisement
But if we’ve learned anything this year, it’s that we can’t ever count on things staying the same. We’ve just got to throw ourselves into whatever our normality is right now. And if that means a cocktail before noon, so be it.
Rebecca Hastings is a freelance journalist. Follow her on Twitter at @rebz_hastings


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Elf On The Shelf Ideas To Get You Through Week Three

Elf On the Shelf
Congratulations! You’ve made it to week three – and if you’re still with us, we’ve got a few more elf ideas to share with you.
Last week, we offered you some ideas that require very little effort – but this week is a bit of a mix. If you fancy putting a little more time into your elf’s adventures, there are some suggestions below. If you don’t, no one’s judging you.
Advertisement
Oh and remember: your elf can literally just sit on the shelf in a different spot each day. You really don’t have to make a mini elf dressing gown with a mini elf bathtub. Enjoy!
1. Pet-Loving Elf
Whether he’s sitting on your dog’s back, on top of the hamster’s cage, or snuggling in the cat bed with your feline friend, let your elf be best buds with your pets this week.
2. Upside Down Elf
Tie his legs on your child’s door handle, so the elf is hanging upside down, ready to greet them when they wake up.
Advertisement
3. Graffiti Elf
Grab a pen and some fruit (bananas work well) and do a bit of doodling on items in your fruit bowl. Naughty elf, you’ll say, when your little one sees what they’ve done.
4. Friendly Elf
Now, you could invite over your neighbour’s elf for an elf bath (in a pan or slow cooker filled with towels or, in the case below, marshmallows). Or if you have two kids and two elves, just say they had a spa day together!
Advertisement
5. Football Fanatic Elf
This one requires a little more effort – are you up for the challenge? You can either buy a little doll-size football kit or have a go at making your own. Our suggestion? Draw it on a paper T-shirt and stick it to his front.
6. Stuck Elf
Only sellotape and present bows needed.
7. Boozy Elf


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Will A New Year’s Resolution Be Enough To Combat A Covid Third Wave?

LOADING ERROR LOADING
You’re reading The Waugh Zone, our daily politics briefing. Sign up now to get it by email in the evening.
“We know from experience that the best thing to do in the face of this virus is to act fast, not to wait to see its growth continue – and we do not rule out further action.” As he announced London and other parts of the south east would go into the highest tier of Covid restrictions this week, Matt Hancock sounded decisive, forthright and bold.
Advertisement
The numbers for the capital, Essex and Hertfordshire were certainly alarming. And the health secretary sounded like someone who had learned from the past two waves of this awful virus that acting quickly and firmly was crucial.
But when he was asked why he would within a week be relaxing the rules again over Christmas, the contrast was painfully obvious. Talk of acting decisively and boldly went out of the window. In its place came fudge and obfuscation, dither and blather.
To be fair, both Hancock and chief medical officer Chris Whitty were distinctly uneasy, if not queasy, about the prospect of a mass festive booze-up letting Covid rip once more. Whitty in particular used the third person to explain the Christmas decision, saying “the feeling was this is a very important time for families…”
Under repeated questioning, Hancock fell back onto the idea that this was all about “personal responsibility”, about the public taking a minimalist interpretation of the rules, not a maximalist one. Boris Johnson himself dipped a toe into this language on Saturday (curiously in a Tory fundraiser not an address to the nation), saying he would “urge people to err on the side of caution rather than, I’m afraid, have a big blow-out with multiple households”. But there’s a difference between “erring” and just going “er….well….er…you decide”.
Advertisement
The health secretary did eventually give a vaguely bit of concrete advice on Christmas, coming close to saying we should self isolate for a few days before meeting grandparents. “The best thing you can do if you want to see elderly relatives at Christmas is to be extremely careful now about who you see,” is how he put it.
Yet that advice on social isolation seems absent in London, with Gavin Williamson threatening legal action against councils that want schools to close early. The final few days of school before Christmas are often hardly exam-intensive, so why wouldn’t it make sense for young children to effectively isolate for 10 days (the new approved period) before meeting granny and grandpa?
University students have been forced to do that, so why not students aged 15 to 18? Students will be staggering return in the New Year too. Shaun Bailey, the Tory candidate for Mayor of London, had what seemed a sensible suggestion, to also delay the return of schools by a week in January, just to add an extra means of tempering the Christmas uptick in cases.
Hancock just wouldn’t answer the question as to whether there were any circumstances under which he would cancel the Christmas relaxations. Was that because he was not ruling anything out? Or not ruling anything in? On the one hand was that line that “we do not rule out further action”, on the other was the emphasis on people wanting to meet up after a hard year.
In some ways, it would just have been more honest if he had just said “look, our modelling shows that if we told people not to mix households, they’d do it anyway”. Changing course would of course run the danger of mixed messaging too, although in many ways that ship has sailed ever since the meaningless “stay alert” became the government’s lame public health slogan. Some polling shows it was that bit of blancmange, before Dominic Cummings’ eyesight failure, that started the slide in public confidence in Johnson from the stratospheric levels earlier this year.
Advertisement
It’s possible that “further action” could be localised in the hardest hit areas, with a “Tier 4” set of restrictions on households. Would the government risk a three-day rather than five-day period of mixed households? Would it risk reducing the number of bubbles from three to two? Would it really face mass disobedience if it did so? Imagine if Leeds and Manchester come out of Tier 3 for a mere few weeks, only to see Christmas surges put them back into the high level again?
Which brings us to this whole issue of “personal responsibility”. The government decided during the first wave of this pandemic that in fact leaving conduct to personal responsibility wouldn’t be either morally right or clinically effective as a way of combating the virus. There was instead a “government responsibility” to act.
Given the asymptomatic nature of this virus, the actions of a badly behaved (or ill-informed) minority can ruin things for everyone as it only takes a few super spreaders to wreak havoc very quickly. That’s precisely why Hancock famously stepped up the rhetoric at one point to say: ”This advice is not a request – it is an instruction.”
In fact, the government hardened its stance steadily through even the “unlockdown” of the summer and early autumn, turning “guidance” into actual legal requirements and prohibitions. Given that hospitalisations are now getting dangerously high (this week is very close to the second wave peak and in Wales some hospitals are near capacity in a way they weren’t in the first lockdown), citing “personal responsibility” sounds blithe at best, negligent at worst.
There could be some cynicism at work here. YouGov found back in September that 49% of Britons believed that the public would be more to blame for a second coronavirus wave, compared to 31% who think the government would primarily be responsible. “Nothing to do with me, govt” could be the Johnson thinking.
Advertisement
There could also be another very crude calculation going on in Whitehall right now, given the political pain of curtailing Christmas mixing: ministers may be thinking the public will swallow a Covid equivalent of “Blue Monday”. That’s the third week in January, when dark nights, cold weather, looming credit card bills and post-blow-out diets really start to bite. It’s also the most likely time the lagging hospital rates could force a fresh, third national lockdown.
But later January is also about the time that New Year’s resolutions tend to be broken too. If there’s a 2021 lockdown at the same time, what are the odds that even more of the public start using “personal responsibility” to guide their conduct? Don’t forget that a New Year third wave would be different from the first two waves because it would coincide exactly with the time the NHS is every year under most strain.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Trump's Officially Lost As Biden Secures Enough Electors To Become US President

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Joe Biden has officially secured enough electoral votes to become the next president of the United States.
Biden crossed the Electoral College’s 270-vote threshold on Monday, confirming his win in the November 7 election. States will continue to report elector tallies Monday evening, and they will be officially tallied during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.
Advertisement
Just as he did in election projections, state certifications, recounts and numerous lawsuits, Donald Trump lost.
“In this battle for the soul of America, democracy prevailed,” Biden plans to say during a speech Monday night, according to prepared remarks. “We the people voted. Faith in our institutions held. The integrity of our elections remains intact.”
Under normal circumstances, this step in the process would not be big news, as the clear loser would have already conceded. But Trump — who got nearly 7 million fewer votes than Biden, and has not raised a single credible voting irregularity — has refused to acknowledge his defeat, and has desperately tried to overturn the results. Before and after Election Day, Trump cast doubt on the integrity of the US voting system, repeatedly and baselessly calling mail-in ballots fraudulent. Trump’s campaign filed dozens of election lawsuits in multiple states, losing nearly all 60 of them.
It’s unclear whether the electoral votes will influence congressional Republicans, most of whom are following Trump’s lead in claiming that election results are still up in the air.
Advertisement
“This year, it seems as if Joe Biden has had to be declared the winner of the presidential election again and again and again ― and still, our Republican colleagues have not fully come to grips with that reality,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Monday on the Senate floor. “Just how many times does President Trump have to lose before rank-and-file Republicans, before most senators, acknowledge that Joe Biden will be the next president of the United States?”
Although the country has known for weeks that Biden would likely become the 46th president, the Constitution requires the Electoral College to pick the president, not voters. The Electoral College is made up of 538 electors ― people picked in all 50 states by state parties. Some electors are political heavyweights like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Georgia’s Stacey Abrams, while others are from other walks of life.
“I believe we should abolish the Electoral College and select our president by the winner of the popular vote, same as every other office,” Clinton, a New York elector, tweeted on Monday afternoon. “But while it still exists, I was proud to cast my vote in New York for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.”
Clinton, who won the popular vote but lost the presidential election in 2016, is one of many Democrats who have called to end the Electoral College because it is inherently undemocratic. For example, if around 80,000 votes in a few key states were different, Biden would be the Electoral College loser despite his 7 million-vote win.
During his speech Monday night, Biden will reiterate his promise to be a president “for all Americans.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Gavin Williamson Tells Council To Keep Schools Open Or Face Legal Action

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Education secretary Gavin Williamson has told Greenwich Council to keep schools open to all pupils or it will face legal action in a dramatic stand-off as coronavirus cases surge.
Schools in the south-east London borough were told to switch to remote learning for most pupils from Monday evening in a letter from council leader Danny Thorpe.
Advertisement
Three councils in London have now advised schools to move to online teaching following a pre-Christmas spike in Covid-19 infections.
Following in the footsteps of the local authority in Greenwich, both Islington and Waltham Forest councils recommended on Monday that schools should close their doors to all but vulnerable pupils and the children of key workers.
Instead, classes should be taken online to avoid social interactions, council leaders said.
But on Monday evening, Williamson issued a temporary continuity direction to Greenwich demanding it withdraw letters to head teachers and parents.
The direction states it is enforceable by Williamson making an application to the High Court or the county court for an injunction if the council does not comply.
Advertisement
The education secretary said in a statement: “It is simply not in children’s best interests for schools in Greenwich, Islington or elsewhere to close their doors.”
He added: “I have always been clear that using legal powers is a last resort but continuity of education is a national priority. That’s why I won’t hesitate to do what is right for young people and have issued a direction to Greenwich Council setting out that they must withdraw the letter issued to headteachers on Sunday.
“The Regional Schools Commissioner will continue to work closely with Greenwich Council and schools in the borough, as we have done with schools across the country, to support them with any operational challenges they face and ensure children can continue to receive face-to-face education.”
Thorpe said the council was seeking legal advice and would respond to Mr Williamson on Tuesday morning.
PhotoAlto/Frederic Cirou via Getty Images
Advertisement
The new advice came on the same day that health secretary Matt Hancock confirmed that the capital would move into the toughest tier 3 restrictions from Wednesday amid a surge in Covid-19 infections.
Data from the Greater London Authority published on Sunday showed that 17 out of 32 London boroughs recorded a seven-day infection rate that exceeded 200 cases per 100,000 people.
On Monday, mayor of London Sadiq Khan called on the government to consider telling all schools and colleges in the city to close early for Christmas and reopen later in January, “with extra resource provided to support online learning”.
But the prime minister’s official spokesman said that the government expected all schools and colleges to remain open until December 17.
“We’ve consistently said that not being in school has a detrimental impact on children’s learning as well as their own personal development and mental health,” he said.
Advertisement
“Which is why we expect all schools and colleges to remain open until the end of term on Thursday, as schools have remained open throughout the pandemic.”
A spokesperson for the Department for Education said it was a “national priority” that children “remain in school until the end of term”.
“Schools, colleges and early years settings across the country have worked tremendously hard to put protective measures in place that are helping reduce the risk of the virus being transmitted and our regional school commissioner teams continue to support local authorities and school trusts to remain open and help resolve any operational issues,” they said.
Labour leader Keir Starmer also urged leaders to try to keep schools open during the last week of term as he said closures are “difficult” for vulnerable children and can leave parents in the lurch.
But announcing the local authority’s decision to ask schools to close their doors to most pupils from Tuesday afternoon, Islington Council leader Richard Watts pointed to a “serious and very worrying rise in coronavirus across London”.
Advertisement
“This is a very difficult decision – however the public health situation in Islington and London is so serious that we have to do everything we can to stop this deadly virus spreading in our community and across London,” he said.
The council has advised schools to pivot to online learning until January 11 – a week after pupils would usually return to the classroom after Christmas.
Another London council is recommending switch to online learning (after consulting headteachers). pic.twitter.com/xU1XNC2755 — Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) December 14, 2020
Meanwhile Clare Coghill, leader of Waltham Forest Council, said “decisive action” was needed to control the spread of the virus in the borough.
After speaking to primary and secondary school headteachers, as well as teaching unions, the local authority has called for classes to move online “as soon as possible”.
Advertisement
“Each individual school will make their own decision and will contact parents to make arrangements for children’s continued learning this week,” Coghill said.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Self-Isolate If You Want To See Elderly Relatives At Christmas, Matt Hancock Suggests

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Matt Hancock has signalled people should self-isolate before seeing elderly relatives at Christmas as he defended moves to relax pandemic restrictions over the festive period.
The health secretary came under scrutiny at a Downing Street press conference over the five-day relaxation as Covid-19 cases are surging across the UK, and was asked whether the lighter rules were going ahead “at any cost”.
Advertisement
It came as a new coronavirus variant is spreading rapidly through southern England, with London and parts of the commuter belt placed under tougher restrictions in response to soaring cases.
The announcement moves almost 10.8 million people into Tier 3, with 61% of England’s population under the toughest restrictions from Wednesday.
Acknowledging Christmas gatherings could put lives at risk, Hancock said: “The best thing you can do if you want to see elderly relatives at Christmas is to be extremely careful now about who you see.”
The Cabinet minister refused to spell out the circumstances that would lead to a U-turn on relaxing Covid-19 restrictions, repeatedly suggesting decisions were a “personal responsibility”.
Advertisement
Asked about Christmas, Hancock said: “I think it is important that all of us are cautious ahead of Christmas and very careful in terms of the contact that we have, especially with people who we know are vulnerable to this disease.
“It is our personal responsibility to make sure that we follow that.”
Between December 23 and 27, families in the UK will be allowed to form a three-household bubble to celebrate Christmas – a policy announced by the government at the end of November.
But there has since been a rise in Covid-19 infections, with the number of people testing positive week-on-week jumping by 19% to 126,263 between December 7 and 13.
The health secretary sidestepped a question on whether there were any circumstances in which the Christmas relaxation of Covid rules would be re-assessed.
Hancock said: “Our messages around Christmas are really clear. We understand why people want to see their loved ones, especially at this time of year, especially after this year.
Advertisement
“But it must be done in a way that is careful and responsible, and I think people understand that too.
“If you are planning to meet up with loved ones at Christmas, then being careful now, two weeks ahead, making sure you minimise the chance of both catching the disease and passing it on is the right thing to do – actually, that’s the right thing to do all the time.”
Despite this, Hancock also warned of “further action” to crackdown on the spread of Covid-19.
He said: “We know from experience that the best thing to do in the face of this virus is to act fast, not to wait to see its growth continue – and we do not rule out further action.”
Meanwhile, a member of the Independent Sage group has urged ministers must make it clear that just because the public are allowed to form Christmas social bubbles, it does not mean they should.
The warning from Professor Christina Pagel – director of UCL’s Clinical Operational Research Unit – who told HuffPost UK: “I think what the government needs to do now – given that it has already said what the rules are for Christmas and people have made plans accordingly – is to give the messaging that, just because you can, it doesn’t mean you should.”
Advertisement
The government is also not doing enough to inform people about how to safely socialise over the festive period, she said.
“That messaging just isn’t there and that is what really worries me – that people have got the message that because it’s allowed, it’s okay and they should do it.
“I think the government really has to say: ‘You know what, it’s allowed, but we do not recommend that you do it’.”
Pagel said the news of surging cases made it “even more important” that people consider the safety of their Christmas plans.
“It just makes it even more important, especially for people who are in the south who are thinking of visiting family out of here,” she said.
Advertisement
“Because if it is concentrated in the south east and London, the last thing you want is to then transport it to everywhere across the country. And that’s how it would get there – by person-to-person interaction. Covid can’t travel on a train by itself.”
The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) – the group of scientists that advises the government – has said that if people choose to socialise at Christmas, they can minimise the risk of spreading the virus by meeting outdoors, limiting the amount of time they spend together and by not staying at each others’ homes overnight.
Meanwhile, Independent Sage has issued its own three-point plan, suggesting that for most families, it would be better to plan alternative “Christmas” celebrations for the summer.
But the prime minister’s official spokesperson said Number 10 was not reconsidering the relaxation of coronavirus restrictions over the festive period.
“There are no plans to review the Christmas guidance,” he told reporters on Monday. “What we’ve said alongside that is that the public should continue to be cautious.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--New Covid Variant: What It Means When A Virus Changes

LOADING ERROR LOADING
New Covid-19 variants are coming to light. These are each a version of the virus that has undergone genetic changes, also known as mutations.
Some mutations may change the characteristics of the virus and how it interacts with humans – for example, how quickly it spreads.
Advertisement
Here’s what we know about them.
The UK variant
The first is the UK variant, which has been called the Variant of Concern 202012/01 (VOC) by Public Health England. It is sometimes referred to as B.1.1.7. This variant is believed to be more infectious – and, as Boris Johnson revealed in a press briefing on January 22 – it is now thought it could be more deadly, too.
The South Africa variant
A second, “highly concerning” variant is the South Africa variant (also known as 501Y.V2), which has also been detected in the UK, in two cases in December. A recent rise in cases in South Africa appears to be a result of 501Y.V2, which is said to carry a heavier viral load and seems to be more prevalent among young people.
The Brazil variant
The third variant has been referred to as the Brazil variant – although there are actually two Brazilian variants on scientists’ radars right now. One of them is considered to be “of concern” and is not thought to have reached the UK. The other, which is thought to be less of a problem, has been circulating in the UK since summer 2020.
Advertisement
How has the virus changed?
There are eight key strains – or clades – of the virus that have been identified worldwide. Think of them as branches on a tree. They all stem from one common ancestor, but have branched off (mutated) to become different things.
Advertisement
The new UK variant is defined by the presence of specific mutations, rather than a clade, Public Health England told HuffPost UK. This particular variant includes a mutation in the “spike” protein, which may result in the virus spreading more easily between people.
It’s not unusual for a virus to mutate. In fact, there are around one to two mutations of SARS-CoV-2 per month, which means many thousands of mutations have developed since the virus emerged in 2019, according to the Covid-19 Genomics UK Consortium.
How serious are these new variants?
The UK variant that first developed in late summer or early autumn 2020 is far more transmissible than previous versions, according to a study from Imperial College London that is still preprint (ie. research shared before it has been peer reviewed).
The report on the new variant suggests it increases the R number by between 0.4 and 0.7. It also found “a small but statistically significant shift” towards under 20s being more affected by the new variant.
Boris Johnson said on January 22: “In addition to spreading more quickly, it also now appears that there is some evidence that the new variant, the variant that was first identified in London and the south-east, may be associated with a higher degree of mortality.”
Advertisement
Chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance explained that with the original strain of Covid-19, roughly 10 out of every 1,000 men in their 60s who get infected would be expected to die. With the new variant, this risk would rise to roughly 13 or 14 out of every 1,000.
Vallance stressed the data was “currently uncertain”, but conceded “obviously this is a concern”.
The South African variant is also thought to be more transmissible. Speaking to BBC radio on January 4, Matt Hancock said he was “incredibly worried” about the South African variant and said it was “even more of a problem than the UK new variant” as it is thought to be more transmissible and has mutated further.
There is concern that the Brazil variant is also more transmissible. During a briefing, Prof Barclay said initial studies suggest the Brazil variants “might impact the way that some people’s antibodies can see the virus” – this means there may be more of a risk of reinfection.
But further research is needed to determine whether this is the case.
Do the variants cause different symptoms?
There is some evidence emerging that the UK variant might have different symptoms to what we’re used to.
Coughs, sore throats, fatigue and muscle pain are more commonly reported symptoms of the new UK coronavirus variant, according to data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). However, fewer people testing positive for the variant appear to be experiencing a loss of taste or smell.
Advertisement
People are still advised to keep an eye out for a fever, persistent cough and a change to, or loss of, smell or taste – and to book a test if they experience any of these symptoms.
Dr Susan Hopkins, Test and Trace and PHE joint medical advisor, reminds people that the best way to stop infection is to stick to the rules: “wash our hands, wear a face covering and keep our distance from others.”
Does the vaccine still work with these variants?
Scientists are monitoring how the virus is mutating because it could impact the effectiveness of vaccines, the severity of illness, the transmissibility of the virus (how easily it spreads) and also the effectiveness of treatments, such as antiviral drugs.
The Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine is “just as effective at fighting the UK variant as it is the original virus”, new research suggests. Oxford University researchers who developed the vaccine say it has a similar efficacy against the variant first detected in Kent and the South East of the UK, compared to the original strain of Covid-19 that it was tested against.
Andrew Pollard, chief investigator on the Oxford vaccine trial, said: “Data from our trials of the ChAdOx1 vaccine in the United Kingdom indicate that the vaccine not only protects against the original pandemic virus, but also protects against the novel variant, B117, which caused the surge in disease from the end of 2020 across the UK.”
Advertisement
Professor Tom Solomon, director of the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at the University of Liverpool, previously said: “Just because there has been a small change in the virus’ genetic make-up, this does not mean it is any more virulent, nor that vaccines won’t be effective.
“Our experience from previous similar viruses suggests that the vaccines will be effective despite small genetic changes.”
However, Sir Patrick Vallance said a press briefing on January 22 that the Brazilian and South African variants are of more concern than the UK strain because there are fears they may be less susceptible to vaccines.
The chief scientific adviser told the Downing Street press conference: “We know less about how much more transmissible they are. We are more concerned that they have certain features that they might be less susceptible to vaccines.
“They are definitely of more concern than the one in the UK at the moment, and we need to keep looking at it and studying it very carefully.”
Advertisement
One preprint study found the vaccine did appear to work against the spike protein behind both the strains from the UK and South Africa. Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist at the University of Warwick, said this was “encouraging news”.
“The preprint demonstrates that antibodies from individuals vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine is able to block infection (neutralise) with an engineered form of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that contains one of the key mutations in the spike gene (N501Y) found in the UK variant,” he said.
“This mutation is also present in the South African variant. However, for both virus variants there are other changes which might affect infectivity and these have not been examined.”
Professor Stephen Evans, an expert in pharmacoepidemiology from London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said that while this finding was “good news”, it did not yet give total confidence that the Pfizer (or other) vaccines would definitely give protection against the variants.
“We need to test this in clinical experience and the data on this should be available in the UK within the next few weeks,” he said.
Advertisement
Dr Richard Lessells, an infectious disease expert in South Africa, previously told the Guardian: “There are a few more concerns with our variant [than that in the UK] for the vaccine … But we are now doing the careful, methodical work in the lab to answer all the questions we have, and that takes time.”
In the UK, Sir John Bell, regius professor of medicine at Oxford University, who helped develop its vaccine, also aired concerns over the South African variant, as it has undergone “substantial changes in the structure of the [virus] protein”.
He told Times Radio: “My gut feeling is the vaccine will be still effective against the Kent [ie. UK] strain. I don’t know about the South African strain – there’s a big question mark about that.”
Dr Zania Stamataki, a viral immunologist at the University of Birmingham, previously said that if the Covid-19 vaccines do need to be amended, “it will not be a major undertaking to update the new vaccines when necessary in the future.
“This year has seen significant advances take place to build the infrastructure for us to keep up with this coronavirus,” she said.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Jesy Nelson Is Leaving Little Mix After Nine Years With The Band

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Little Mix singer Jesy Nelson has announced that she is leaving the band after nine years.
On Monday evening, Jesy confirmed that she was stepping down from the group, with the singer saying that being part of Little Mix had “taken a toll” on her mental health in recent times.
“The truth is recently being in the band has really taken a toll on my mental health,” she explained, in a statement posted on Instagram. “I find the constant pressure of being in a girl group and living up to expectations very hard.
Advertisement
“There comes a time in life when we need to reinvest in taking care of ourselves rather than focussing on making other people happy, and I feel like now is the time to begin that process.”
Jesy Nelson at the National Television Awards earlier this year Mike Marsland via Getty Images
“After much consideration and with a heavy heart, I’m announcing I’m leaving Little Mix,” Jesy continued.
“I need to spend some time with the people I love, doing things that make me happy. I’m ready to embark on a new chapter in my life – I’m not sure what it’s going to look like right now, but I hope you’ll still be there to support me.”
Advertisement
She ended her statement with a special message to bandmates Jade Thirlwall, Perrie Edwards and Leigh-Anne Pinnock.
“Thank you... for creating some of the most amazing memories I’ll never forget,” she said. “I hope that you’ll continue to fulfill all of your dreams and keep on making music that people love.”
An additional statement was then posted on Little Mix’s Instagram page, in which the remaining members of the band affirmed their hopes to continue as a three-piece.
“This is an incredibly sad time for all of us but we are fully supportive of Jesy,” they said. “We love her very much and agree that it is so important that she does what is right for her mental health and well-being.
Advertisement
“We are still very much enjoying our Little Mix journey and the three of us are not ready for it to be over. We know that Jesy leaving the group is going to be really upsetting news for our fans. We love you guys so much and are so grateful for your loyalty and continued support of all of us.”
In recent times, Perrie, Leigh-Anne and Jade have made numerous public appearances as a trio, following the news last month that Jesy was taking an extended break from the band.
This included including hosting the MTV EMAs, judging the final of their reality show Little Mix The Search and performing their recent single Break Up Song on Strictly Come Dancing over the weekend.
The original four members of Little Mix HGL via Getty Images
Advertisement
Little Mix were put together on The X Factor in 2011, having originally auditioned as solo artists, and went on to become the first ever band to win the ITV talent show.
Since then, they’ve topped the UK singles chart on four occasions – including with signature tracks like Black Magic and Shout Out To My Ex – and received two Brit Awards.
Last month, they released their sixth album Confetti, which peaked at number two in the UK, and was preceded by the singles Break Up Song, Holiday and their current hit Sweet Melody.
The band are currently scheduled to tour the UK in 2021, where they’ll be supported by boyband Since September, the winners of the talent show Little Mix The Search.
More to follow.
Useful websites and helplines
Mind, open Monday to Friday, 9am-6pm on 0300 123 3393.
Samaritans offers a listening service which is open 24 hours a day, on 116 123 (UK and ROI - this number is FREE to call and will not appear on your phone bill).
Advertisement
CALM (the Campaign Against Living Miserably) offer a helpline open 5pm-midnight, 365 days a year, on 0800 58 58 58, and a webchat service.
The Mix is a free support service for people under 25. Call 0808 808 4994 or email help@themix.org.uk


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Being Banned From Donating My Blood Was Dehumanising. I’m Glad The Law Is Changing

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Like getting excited over your first mobile phone or waving the teary parents off after being dropped off at university, being able to donate blood is seen as one of life’s signs that you’re a grown-up.
But not for gay and bisexual men. Until this week – or more accurately, until next summer – we have been banned from donating our blood, unless we abstained from sexual activity for more than three months. It’s always felt dehumanising.
Advertisement
There’s something markedly unsettling and contradictory about the messaging around blood donations for people like me. On one hand, donating blood is promoted as one of the most upstanding things a citizen can do for others – and yet a whole class of people are blocked from going about this selfless good deed, even if they wanted to.
So why not us? According to the NHS, “the 3-month wait is to reduce the risk of any very recently acquired infections not being detected on screening and further tests. This applies to all donors whose partners may be at a higher risk of blood borne infections.” This is because “at a population level, men who have sex with men are at an increased risk of acquiring certain infections through sex.”
In plain terms, this had meant that men who have sex with men must abstain from sexual behaviour for three months before they can donate - even if you have no obvious health ailments. But now, a new ruling means men who have sex with men can now give blood – so long as they have only had anal sex with one male partner in the last three months.
The process leading to this change has felt excruciating and slow, like a needle slowly penetrating the skin. Pressure groups such as Freedom To Donate – who successfully brought the wait time down to three months from twelve in 2017 – have been campaigning for this exact ruling for years, saying men “should be treated as people, not on the basis of their sexuality,” when it comes to donating. And this seems like a fair deal to me, as it means those of us that practice safe and responsible sex have the same right to donate blood as the next straight male who also acts similarly.
Advertisement
In the UK, we’re lucky, relatively speaking, that LGBTQ representation and acceptance is broadly very high – but sometimes that can mask where there is still work to be done. Many injustices still pervade our daily lives such as the heightened levels of abuse some queer people face, as well as systematic marginalisation, and many of us aren’t as okay with the slow progress as we may seem.
For people outside of the community, it may seem like not being able to donate blood is a small thing. But it’s sometimes the simplest injustices which feel the most bizarre and hurt the most. What people may not realise is that dehumanising rules like these reinforce feelings of shame that many LGBTQ people carry around with them as a heavy mental burden each day. By being discounted from an activity most people are encouraged to do, we’re reminded that we are perceived to be ‘different’ by some in society – no matter how many times people tell us we aren’t.
From the seemingly small things like volunteering with elders this Christmas to the seismic things like having the option to have children with our partners, being included is not only fair – it makes us feel like we are one and the same.
And feeling included is perhaps more important than ever for LGBTQ people: during the pandemic, people like me were revealed to have struggled with their mental health disproportionately more than straight people.
If my friendship group and set of acquaintances is anything to go by, this fact is certainly true, and so, on the one hand, we can actually take this ruling as a positive thing – a reminder of how helpful we can be towards others.
Advertisement
So although this has taken far too long – and for many of us the damage will have already been done in the years we’ve been told we’re banned – at least we can use this inevitably symbolic time of year to think of the positive effects the new ruling will have on many LGBTQ people.
Let’s also not forget that over the last 10 years, there has been a 40% drop in the number of people giving blood so I’d assume the NHS needs all the blood it can get to improve the lives of more Britons. We can take stock – and potentially sign up to donate – in the knowledge that in the NHS’ eyes, we’re now as valuable as everyone else.
Complications still remain: PrEP users, for instance, still cannot give blood unless they come off their medication, and neither can donors who have engaged in anal sex with a new partner or more than one partner in the three months prior to donating.
But, for many of us, this is a landmark ruling worth celebrating. Giving blood may not be warm and fuzzy, but the sentiment is the Christmas message of inclusion many of us have long sought out.
Adam Bloodworth is a features writer at HuffPost UK. Follow him on Twiter at @adamzx.
Have a compelling personal story you want to tell? Find out what we’re looking for here, and pitch us on ukpersonal@huffpost.com


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--New Covid Variant Is Spreading More Quickly, Matt Hancock Says

LOADING ERROR LOADING
There is a new variant of coronavirus in England which is spreading more quickly and could be the cause of increased infection rates in London and the south-east, Matt Hancock has said.
The health secretary’s startling revelation came as he confirmed that London will be placed into the toughest tier 3 Covid restrictions from midnight on Wednesday.
Advertisement
More than 1,000 cases have been identified, mainly in the south-east of England.
But cases have also been found in 60 different local authority areas and “numbers are increasing rapidly”, Hancock said.
He told the Commons: “Over the last few days, thanks to our world class genomic capability in the UK, we have identified a new variant of coronavirus which may be associated with the faster spread in the south-east of England.
“Initial analysis suggests that this variant is growing faster than the existing variants.”
He went on: “I must stress at this point that there is currently nothing to suggest that this variant is more likely to cause serious disease.
“And the latest clinical advice is that it is highly unlikely that this mutation would fail to respond to the vaccine.
Advertisement
“But it shows we’ve got to be vigilant and follow the rules and everyone needs to take personal responsibility not to spread this virus.”
Hancock said the UK has notified the World Health Organisation about the new variant and Public Health England is continuing to analyse it at its Porton Down lab.
Commons health committee chair Jeremy Hunt asked Hancock when we would know for sure whether existing Covid vaccines work against the new variant.
Hancock said the strain was being assessed now but added: “The medical advice that we have is that it is highly unlikely that this new variant will impinge the vaccine and the impact of the vaccine.
“But we will know that in the coming days and weeks as the new strand is cultured at Porton Down, and then of course the tests conducted upon it.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Tory MP Peter Bone Got Absolutely Monstered While Trying To Defend A No-Deal Brexit On Sky News

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Brexiteer Peter Bone has tried to defend the “upside” of a no-deal Brexit by ignoring a £145 billion financial black hole and suggesting only the price of “Mercedes cars and French wine” will go up.
Appearing on Sky News on Monday, the Tory MP insisted post-Brexit tariffs would provide a bonanza of spare cash that the government could use to “improve the economy of this country”.
Advertisement
He said: “One of the things people tend to forget is there’ll be more tariffs imposed on EU imports to us and we would pay on our exports. I think something like £13bn will be available for the government to use to cut taxes or support businesses.
“And also, we’ll collect the £2.7bn that goes to the EU every year.”
What Bone didn’t mention was the projected £160bn hit to the economy in the event of a no-deal Brexit, more than ten times greater than the financial benefits he touted.
Pressed by host Adam Boulton to account for this deficit, Bone instead regaled the host with a recollection of his own time as a businessman when he... sold goods to the EU.
He said: “Well I was in business for years before I became an MP and I used to sell stuff all over the world to most of the EU and non-EU countries, trading on WTO rules or a free trade basis and it was no big problem.”
Advertisement
Boulton tried again, saying: “Yes but where is this surplus of cash that you believe is one of the benefits of Brexit going to come from?”
Flustered, Bone reverted back to the minimal savings he had already mentioned, saying: “If you’re charging tariffs, that goes to the government and you can use that.
“And the £2.7bn that is given to the EU will automatically come to us. So there is an upside, it’s not all down.”
Sky News
Bone also appeared to suggest that the only things that would go up in price were luxury good and foreign wine, saying: “And on food prices, obviously we can lower the tariffs on stuff that’s coming in from outside the EU and making those prices cheaper.
Advertisement
“I was listening to one farmer yesterday who said food prices will fall.
“Yes, consumer prices on Mercedes cars will go up, yes French wine will go up...”
At this point, he was interrupted by Labour MP Siobhain McDonagh who pointed out that it was also basic foodstuffs that will go up in price.
“And on milk, and on vegetables and on bread and all the things people need in order to live,” she said.
Bone’s assertion that food prices will not be affected by Brexit are not supported by the evidence.
The Scottish Retail Consortium (SRC) has said if no trade deal is in place, retailers will struggle to insulate consumers from the impact of £3bn of new tariffs on food.
Undeterred, Bone then suggested Brits might get cheaper coffee after Brexit, saying: “If we decide to eliminate tariffs on say, coffee, then we can.”
But as McDonagh pointed out: “I’m not sure we’re much of a coffee exporter.”
Again, Bone’s claim about cheaper coffee is not supported by any evidence. A report by the British Coffee Association has said “tariffs on roasted coffee imported from the EU would be set at 7.5%, and tariffs on instant coffee set at 9%, which would add a massive cost on to the manufacturing and supply of UK coffee.”
Advertisement
It added: “The imposition of tariffs could even lead to reduced consumer choice of coffee varieties and brands on the market in the UK as it would make the environment impossible, for some of the smaller brands or European-based companies in particular, to play in.”
So did Bone say anything right? No. He even said there would be no disruption at UK ports despite the fact the disruption has already begun.
He said: “On the disruption to supply chains, I sit on the EU Select Committee and we’ve heard evidence both from the Port of Dover and the Port of Calais that there won’t be any disruption.”
He then suggested current queues at ports are only happening because we are still not fully out of the EU.
“We’re in the EU at the moment so the disruption now is because we’re in the EU and we’re not out yet. Well, we’re out of the EU but we’re in the transition period.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--London To Be Placed Under Tier 3 Coronavirus Restrictions From Wednesday

LOADING ERROR LOADING
London will be placed under tier 3 coronavirus restrictions from Wednesday amid a surge in cases across the capital, Matt Hancock has announced.
The health secretary revealed the decision during a briefing for MPs on Monday afternoon and later confirmed it in a statement to the Commons.
Advertisement
Parts of Essex and Hertfordshire will also be moved into tier 3.
Under the strict rules all hospitality venues, including pubs and restaurants, will be limited to takeaway only.
The tiers were not due to be reviewed until Wednesday, but the government decided to act quicker.
The change in tiers will come into force at 12.01am on Wednesday.
Hancock also told the Commons a new variant of coronavirus has been identified in England.
“I need to tell the House that over the last week, we’ve seen very sharp, exponential rises in the virus across London, Kent, parts of Essex and Hertfordshire,” he said.
“We do not know the extent to which this is because of the new variant but no matter its cause we have to take swift and decisive action which unfortunately is absolutely essential to control this deadly disease while the vaccine is rolled out.”
London is currently in tier 2, but cases have spiked across the city in recent days.
One MP said: “The data we saw on Thursday suggested targeted interventions could have worked, but the escalation in infection suggests only swift and effective action can work now.”
Advertisement
MPs were also warned on a call with public health officials earlier on Monday that infections in the capital were “off the scale”.
The latest official figures show there are 17 London boroughs where the seven-day rate exceeded 200 cases per 100,000 people.
Havering has the highest coronavirus rate in the capital, with 1,314 new cases recorded in the seven days to December 9 – the equivalent of 506.3 cases per 100,000 people. This is up from a rate of 321.3 in the seven days to December 2.
London mayor Sadiq Khan has said tier 3 restrictions would have a “catastrophic” economic impact on the city.
But despite the concern about a rise in infections, No.10 said it had “no plans” to scrap the five-day Christmas pause in restrictions.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-14--Cher Says She's Never Hated Anyone So Much In Her Whole Life As 'Vindictive' Trump

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Cher has said she has never hated anyone in her life as much as she hates Donald Trump, admitting she will be “dancing around” if he were to be prosecuted and imprisoned after leaving the White House.
The singer launched a fresh attack on the US president over his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic in a new interview with the Guardian, having been a vocal critic of Trump throughout his presidency .
Advertisement
“In my country the president doesn’t believe it has anything to do with him,” Cher said. “He doesn’t think he has any responsibility to help us.”
Accusing Trump of creating a “toxic” culture war in America, she continued: “People who just disagreed with each other before are now enemies. I hate to even call him a president because all he does is watch TV.
“I hate him,” she said.
Cher and Donald Trump PA
Asked if she’d ever hated anybody like this before, Cher replied: “No, in my whole life, never.
“I pretty much disliked Bush when he started those wars, and I could say for a minute it was touch and go for hate. But the one thing I know is he loves America and Trump doesn’t.”
Advertisement
She continued: “I said if Trump can’t be in the White House, he’s going to burn it down. He’s trying to block Joe [Biden] at every moment. He’s the most vindictive person I’ve ever witnessed.”
Referring to a number of major lawsuits and criminal investigations Trump could face once his protected status as most powerful man in the world expires in January, Cher said: “I think he’s fighting so hard because he’s going to be prosecuted when he gets out of the White House.”
Asked if he could he end up in prison, she added: “Oh, I hope so. I’ll be dancing around.”
Trump is currently facing an investigation into his tax affairs and business dealings, as well as hush money allegations. Trump has often dismissed investigations into his affairs as politically motivated harassment.
Cher previously attacked Trump over comments he made about a “herd mentality” in relation to the coronavirus pandemic.
She tweeted: “Seems 200,000 dead isn’t enough carnage, misery... for Trump.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--Give Working Class People The Covid Vaccine First

A bus driver wearing a face mask drives over Waterloo Bridge Dan Kitwood via Getty Images
In late April of this year, at the peak of the first wave of the pandemic, many of us were working from home. But Emauel Gomes, a cleaner employed by outsourcing giant OCS, was still cleaning the nearly-empty offices of the Ministry of Justice. Although most of the staff had been sent home weeks ago, Emanuel and his colleagues had been told that they were essential workers, and had to come in.
For a few days, Emanuel Gomes – originally from Guinea-Bissau – had been feeling unwell. According to a colleague, he’d lost his appetite and had a fever. But he couldn’t afford to stay at home.
Advertisement
Like many outsourced workers, Emanuel’s contract didn’t include occupational sick pay. He was on a wage of £9.08 an hour and, should he need to take time off ill, would be entitled to the statutory amount of just £95.85 a week.
“Emanuel went to work feeling sick but the life of an immigrant is like this,” said his brother Leao Gomes. “He knew that if he didn’t work he would get to the end of the month and he wouldn’t have enough money to survive.”
On April 24, Emanuel was so unwell that he didn’t know where he was, and a colleague had to help him get home. He died a few hours later.
Emanuel’s story, unfortunately, is not unique. Covid has not been the great leveller: it has preyed on the vulnerable, and thrived in the chasms of a deeply unequal society.
Advertisement
Sir Michael Marmot’s report on social inequalities and the pandemic, released today, is unsparing in its criticism. Quoting Albert Camus, the report argues that the coronavirus pandemic exposed and exacerbated existing injustices: “Pestilence is at once blight and revelation. It brings the hidden truth of a corrupt world to the surface”.
“Disease does not afflict indiscriminately. Like so many other things, it extracts the highest price from the very poorest.”
The Marmot report documents the uneven distribution of the coronavirus burden across social class. Local authorities with high levels of deprivation also recorded high covid mortality rates, as well as disproportionately high excess deaths.
Overcrowded and poor quality housing was also associated with higher risks of mortality from coronavirus. Meanwhile those in the so-called “elementary workforce” (low-wage workers, including bus and taxi drivers, carers, security guards, postal workers, hospital porters, and cleaners like Emanuel) had the highest mortality rates by occupation in the working age population.
The distribution of mortality by class in part explains the disproportionate death rate amongst the BAME community. Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic people are overrepresented in both deprived areas and the elementary workforce.
Advertisement
Even in professional settings, we’re more likely to work in roles which involve regular contact with other people (and therefore the disease). These imbalances in the workforce and in economic power have contributed to some ethnic minorities being up to four times more at risk of dying from coronavirus than their white British counterparts.
Disease does not afflict indiscriminately. Like so many other things, it extracts the highest price from the very poorest.
I have argued elsewhere that we have to learn the lessons of this pandemic. The virus did not create the inequalities that it was able to exploit. We did.
The Marmot report argues that 10 years of austerity, wage stagnation, housing deterioration and chronic underpayment of sick pay is why the UK has been hit with one of the highest covid death rates in the world.
It is critical that, after the pandemic, we fight for an economic settlement better than the one that brought us here. But we don’t have to wait until the chancellor’s next budget for there to be some kind of redress made to the British working class, who have been protected the least in the face of a deadly disease.
Advertisement
Low-wage workers, who have so far died in disproportionate numbers, should be given priority vaccinations.
Rightly so, the elderly, the clinically vulnerable, and people who work in the health and social care sector are front of the queue. As winter infections continue to rise, vaccination needs to be strategically targeted so that the NHS isn’t overwhelmed and we can have a faster vaccine rollout overall. But until we achieve herd immunity – which means at least 55% of the population being vaccinated – there will still be some risk, the burden of which will fall on those who can’t work from home. Professionals, with or without a vaccine, are more likely than elementary workers to be able to enjoy the relative safety of working from home.
Coronavirus has been an attack on the poor, the underpaid, and the precariously employed. Workers like Emanuel Gomes were left dangerously exposed to infection and death in the worst days of this pandemic. They ought to be amongst the first to enjoy the protection conferred by a vaccine.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--Keir Starmer Demands Urgent Review Of Christmas Covid Rules

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Labour leader Keir Starmer has called for Boris Johnson to urgently review the Covid rules for Christmas amid a sharp rise in cases.
In a letter to the prime minister, Starmer called for Cobra to be convened “in the next 24 hours”, claiming the government has “once again lost control” of the coronavirus pandemic.
Advertisement
It comes amid growing fears the five-day relaxation of the rules between December 23 and 27 could see the pandemic spiral in January, when winter pressures on the NHS are at their most acute.
Meanwhile, London, most of Essex and parts of Hertfordshire are set to move into the strictest local lockdown, tier 3, from Wednesday.
The letter reads: “It has become increasingly clear over recent days that the tier system you introduced two weeks ago has failed to control transmission of Covid-19.
“Sadly, it does now appear that the government has – once again – lost control of infections, putting our economy and our NHS at grave risk in the new year.”
Advertisement
He adds: “I understand that people want to spend time with their families after this awful year, but the situation has clearly taken a turn for the worse since the decision about Christmas was taken. It serves no-one for politicians to ignore this fact.
“It is my view that you should now convene Cobra in the next 24 hours to review whether the current relaxation is appropriate given the rising number of cases.”
Former Tory health secretary Jeremy Hunt has also called for Johnson to review the rules.
He told BBC Radio 4′s World At One: “To go into the start of January, which I remember from my own time as health secretary is always the nightmare period for the NHS, with the same number of beds taken up by Covid as was the case in the peak this April would be a very, very dangerous and precarious situation.”
A 'Stop the spread of Coronavirus' sign seen in Covent Garden. SIPA USA/PA Images
He added: “We need to think about what the public would really want because the economic impact could be worse from taking our foot off the pedal for Christmas if it meant that we then had to go into another national lockdown.”
Advertisement
Three households can be together for five days between December 23 and 27 regardless of what tier the area is in or whether people have self-isolated in advance.
Asked directly on Tuesday if Downing Street was looking at cutting the Christmas period for exemptions from five days to three, or cutting bubbles from three households to two, the prime minister’s official spokesperson said it would keep regulations under review.
He said: “We have set out the guidance for Christmas bubbling arrangements but we obviously keep all advice under constant review.”
In a joint editorial the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and Health Service Journal (HSJ), have also warned Johnson is set to make a “major error” if he does not reverse plans.
Starmer said that Labour would back the government if it moved to tougher restrictions over Christmas in order to avoid a second national lockdown.
Advertisement
“If you conclude with government scientists that we need to take tougher action to keep people safe over Christmas, then you will have my support,” the letter said.
Warning that a failure to act could cause long-term damage to the NHS and economy, Starmer also said the decision over Christmas was “a critical moment for our country”.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--Should Christmas Be Cancelled? Here's What Those In The Know Say

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Next week yet another set of coronavirus restrictions comes into force, a five-day relaxation to allow families to spend Christmas together after a bleak year of lockdowns and social-distancing.
Three different households will be able to mix from December 23 to December 28 and overnight stays will be allowed as part of the festive changes.
Advertisement
But is it a good idea? The latest data on infection rates suggests not – cases are on the rise in most of the country and more parts of the south-east are about to be put into the toughest tier 3 restrictions under which you can’t meet anyone indoors who you don’t live with, let alone two whole other households.
Official government data show there were 35,383 new cases recorded on Thursday (though some 11,000 of them were due to a glitch that delayed earlier reports from Wales) and 18,009 people were in hospital with the disease.
Warning the winter months “are always the most difficult months for people’s health and for the NHS”, he urged caution and said: “We’ve come so far, we mustn’t blow it now.”
The entire “Christmas bubbles” plan is now under intense scrutiny and an increasing number of people are calling for it to be scrapped entirely – including two of the country’s leading health journals, who published a rare joint editorial on Tuesday.
Advertisement
What do those on the front line say?
The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) on Friday urged ministers to provide more clarity and warned the relaxing the rules over Christmas could lead to an “unrelenting tsunami” of cases as we enter the new year.
Dame Donna Kinnair, chief executive of the RCN, said: “Nursing staff are telling me they will not enjoy Christmas knowing what awaits them in January. After caring for tens of thousands of positive cases, supporting families at their lowest ebb and even losing our own colleagues, a quieter festive period is not a sacrifice.
“Governments should be clearer about the risks – not just the rules – and people must make informed choices. The data and the science give cause for vigilance, not relief.
“This virus isn’t taking Christmas off and nor should we. 2021 is a year that holds so much promise – we have all lost too much in 2020 to set ourselves back now.”
Where does the government stand?
Boris Johnson has urged people to have a "smaller" Christmas. Matthew Horwood via Getty Images
Advertisement
On Monday the line was that there were “no plans” to scrap the five-day Christmas pause in Covid restrictions, but Downing Street urged the public to be cautious.
Boris Johnson urged the public to have a “smaller” Christmas than the rules allow amid widespread fear the five-day relaxation of rules will lead to a third wave when the NHS is most under pressure.
The government had wanted a UK-wide approach to Christmas, but Wales will now legislate to restrict mixing to two households – and will go into a tougher lockdown on December 28.
All parts of the UK are issuing tougher guidance, with a joint statement by the governments of the UK, Scotland and Wales now essentially briefing against their own plans by saying: “The safest approach may be not to form a Christmas bubble.”
What have ministers said?
On Monday, business secretary Alok Sharma defended the Christmas freedoms in an interview with Sky News, saying families “come together” during the break.
Advertisement
“I think it is right and balanced and proportionate and that is not going to be changing.”
But an increasing tone of caution can be detected in comments from other senior members of the government.
On Tuesday, Steve Barclay said people gathering in Christmas bubbles should only do “the minimum”, warning the rules should not be “misinterpreted”. “We’re not going from tier 3 to some sort of tier 0,” he said.
He also said he would not be visiting his own parents over Christmas but would be seeing other members of his family.
Acknowledging that it had been a “very difficult” year for families and that many would want to meet up to celebrate Christmas together, he said: “I want to see my own parents over the Christmas period.
“I won’t see my parents over Christmas, but I will see my parents-in-law and those are the decisions many families will take.
Advertisement
“We’ve got to trust the British people to act responsibly and do the minimum that is possible for them in their family situation.”
Oh, and here’s what other ministers said when asked if they personally would be taking advantage of the government’s bubbles scheme. (Hint: most of them evaded the question.)
What’s Labour’s position?
Shadow health secretary Jon Ashworth urged Johnson and Hancock to rethink the measures.
He said: “This isn’t about cancelling Christmas, Santa will still deliver his presents, but is [Hancock] really telling us that allowing indoor mixing of three households across regions and generations for five days is sensible given the virus is raging with such ferocity at the moment?
“And the devastating tragedy is that those who will be most impacted by this virus spreading through the easing are those who will be at the front of the queue for the vaccine in the next month or two.”
MP Chris Bryant had earlier said in a tweet he thought the plan was “a mistake” and urged people to “take our own measures and decide to limit our contacts severely”.
Advertisement
I increasingly think the Christmas relaxation is a mistake which may cost lives and disrupt vaccination. It may be too late to change it legally and I don’t want to criminalise anyone but we could all take our own measures and decide to limit our contacts severely. — Chris Bryant (@RhonddaBryant) December 15, 2020
London mayor Sadiq Khan has also called for the government to rethink plans, telling Sky News: “I would encourage the government to look at their rules over Christmas.
“What I say to the government is: I’m not sure you’ve got it right. In fact, I’m sure you haven’t got it right in relation to the relaxations over Christmas.”
Khan denied he was adopting a “Grinch” approach to Christmas, adding: “[It’s] not being a Grinch at all. I think what [I’m] doing is following the science.”
What do scientists say?
Scientists have expressed concern about rising cases in London. Victoria Jones - PA Images via Getty Images
Advertisement
A number of leading scientists spoke out against the plans since the weekend.
Professor Stephen Reicher, of the University of St Andrews, said: “Right now we are heading towards disaster.
“Given high levels of infection across the country and the increasing levels in some areas such as London it is inevitable that if we all do choose to meet up over Christmas then we will pay the price in the new year.”
Professor John Edmunds, a member of the Sage scientific advisory panel, suggested it “might be best to postpone meeting up with vulnerable relatives” rather than see them over Christmas.
He added: “We should remember that just because we can meet up with two other households, it doesn’t mean that we should.”
David Nabarro, a World Health Organisation (WHO) special envoy working on Covid-19, said the price of such a relaxation “could well be very high”.
Advertisement
Urging people to think carefully about their plans, he told Times Radio: “Just ask yourself, is there any way in which you can perhaps not have the family get-togethers this year?
“It’s much better not to do it when there’s this kind of virus about.”
Where does the World Health Organisation stand?
The WHO issued a strongly-worded appeal this week to European nations, asking citizens to stay home over the festive period.
The organisation’s regional director for Europe Dr Hans Kluge said: “There remains a difference between what you are being permitted to do by your authorities and what you should do.”
In a statement, he continued: “We have a few more months of sacrifice ahead and can behave now in a way that collectively we are proud of. When we look back at these unprecedented times, I hope we all felt we acted with a spirit of shared humanity to protect those in need.”
Dr Kluge said the pandemic’s “devastation” had hit communities across Europe.
“Covid-19 has forced families and communities apart, bankrupted businesses, and deprived people of opportunities that a year ago were taken for granted,” he said.
Advertisement
“From anxieties around virus transmission, the psychological impact of lockdowns and self-isolation, to the effects of unemployment, financial worries and social exclusion – the mental health impact of the pandemic will be long term and far reaching.
“What has resulted is a growing mental health crisis in Europe.”
The health journals
In only their second joint editorial in 100 years, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and Health Service Journal (HSJ) called on the prime minister to change tack because of rising cases of coronavirus across parts of England.
They both warned that hospital bed capacity risked being overwhelmed if there was a Christmas relaxation, calling on the government to “reverse its rash decision to allow household mixing [...] in order to bring numbers down in the advance of a likely third wave”.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--England Secondary School Staff To Be Tested Weekly For Covid From January

People carry out asymptomatic testing using lateral flow antigen at a test centre at Edinburgh University ahead of students being allowed to travel home for the Christmas holidays. PA
Secondary school and college staff in England will be tested weekly for Covid-19 from January, the government has announced.
The Department for Education said that lateral flow tests would be deployed to all secondary schools and colleges to “help detect asymptomatic cases and break chains of transmission”.
Advertisement
It is estimated by the government that one in three people who are infected with Covid-19 do not have symptoms.
As part of the new testing programme, students who have been in close contact with someone who has tested positive for coronavirus will also be eligible for daily testing for seven days.
Under current rules, everyone in a school bubble must self-isolate if someone within it tests positive for Covid-19.
But from January, those who agree to daily tests will not have to self-isolate. School staff will also be eligible for daily testing if they have been identified as a close contact.
Advertisement
Primary schools in England will be supported to roll out testing “as quickly as possible” over the spring term, the government said.
Education secretary Gavin Williamson branded the news “a milestone moment in our work to keep schools and colleges open for all”.
“I know it has taken a phenomenal effort from everyone to ensure approximately 99% of schools have been open each week since the start of term,” he said.
“Testing on this scale brings real benefits to education, it means more children, teachers and staff can stay in their classes in schools and colleges without the need to self-isolate.”
More than 600,000 pupils were off school at one point in November due to Covid outbreaks.
Test kits will begin arriving at secondary schools and colleges for the first phase of rollout to staff from the first week of January.
Advertisement
Dr Susan Hopkins, senior medical adviser to Public Health England and NHS Test and Trace said: “Lateral flow devices are a vital additional tool in helping us detect Covid-19 cases that we wouldn’t otherwise know about, meaning that we can break chains of transmission and save lives.
“In schools these tests can help make students and staff safer by helping us quickly identify many people who are unknowingly carrying high levels of the virus, preventing them from passing it on to others.”
The announcement comes after a row between the Department for Education and councils in London, which had advised schools to move classes online amid rising Covid-19 rates in the capital.
Greenwich, Islington and Waltham Forest councils had all suggested that schools close their doors to all but vulnerable pupils and the children of key workers.
However, in a statement on Monday night, Williamson said: “It is simply not in children’s best interests for schools in Greenwich, Islington or elsewhere to close their doors.”
Advertisement
He added: “I have always been clear that using legal powers is a last resort but continuity of education is a national priority. That’s why I won’t hesitate to do what is right for young people and have issued a direction to Greenwich Council setting out that they must withdraw the letter issued to headteachers on Sunday.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--George Clooney Names Idris Elba As His Pick To Play The Next James Bond

LOADING ERROR LOADING
With speculation as to who will succeed Daniel Craig as the next James Bond mounting, George Clooney has weighed in on who should land the role.
The actor has named fellow Hollywood star Idris Elba has the ideal successor to Daniel.
Speaking on Mark Wright’s Heart Evening Show, George ruled out playing the suave secret agent himself, adding that he thought Bond should be played by a British star.
Advertisement
George Clooney TOLGA AKMEN via Getty Images
He quipped to “go hire someone else!” when asked what he would say to an offer of Bond, adding: “First of all because, I’ll be 60 this year so it’s a little late for the Bond thing. Second of all, Bond should be a Brit don’t you think? I mean properly. It just feels wrong”.
George then said Idris “should be Bond” adding: “He’s elegant, I think he’d do a great job of it.
“That’s who I would’ve cast, sure, absolutely but in general, no I don’t think I should be Bond.”
Idris Elba David M. Benett via Getty Images
“The closest thing I’ve ever done to any kind of hero like that was Batman and we saw how that turned out,” he joked of his much-maligned turn as the Caped Crusader in 1997′s Batman & Robin.
Advertisement
Following the announcement that Daniel will be stepping down as Bond following the release of the upcoming film No Time To Die, stars Idris, Outlander’s Sam Heughan, James Norton and Tom Hardy have all been suggested as contenders for the part.
The much-awaited 25th Bond film was due to be released this year, but has been delayed twice due to the pandemic. It is now scheduled to hit cinemas in April 2021.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--RuPaul's Drag Race UK Series 2 Finally Has A Launch Date Confirmed

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The much-awaited second series of RuPaul’s Drag Race UK finally has a launch date.
After winning over viewers with its first ever British series last year, filming on the second British series of reality competition began earlier in 2020, but had to be put on ice due to coronavirus restrictions.
With filming eventually wrapping in the autumn, the BBC has now confirmed that the first episode of the new series will arrive on the iPlayer on Thursday January 14 2021.
Advertisement
Santa called and said you can have one present early.
The first episode of #DragRaceUK series two lands on @bbciplayer on January 14th at 7PM. pic.twitter.com/yWr5G5zvmt — RuPaul's Drag Race UK (@dragraceukbbc) December 15, 2020
The queens taking part are yet to be announced, but it has been revealed that the new line-up will feature 12 contestants, an increase on the 10 who competed on the first season.
RuPaul will also be back as host and lead judge, alongside returning stars Michelle Visage, Graham Norton and Alan Carr.
RuPaul's Drag Race UK BBC
Advertisement
Last month, casting began on the third series of Drag Race UK, with RuPaul saying in a statement: “We feel honoured that you’ve embraced our little show, and our only wish is that we can offer a smile at a time when we can all use it the most.”
Excitingly, Drag Race UK will be airing at the same time as the 13th series of the regular US show, which debuts in America on New Year’s Day.
For the last few years, the US version of Drag Race has debuted on Netflix in the UK the day after it airs in America, meaning we should expect the first episode on 2 January.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--The Circle's Celebrity Line-Up Features Stars From Strictly Come Dancing And Drag Race UK

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Channel 4 has announced the line-up for the first ever celebrity edition of The Circle, and it’s a veritable “who’s who” of reality TV regulars.
The show – which aired its first two civilian series in 2018 and 2019 – sees people living in isolation and only communicating with one another via a specially-designed social media platform.
Advertisement
In other words, it’s a lot like the events of the last 12 months, to be honest with you.
The twist is that contestants are able to “catfish” their competitors by donning a different online persona to try and make themselves more popular.
Last year saw Richard Madeley getting in on the fun and tricking his fellow contestants into believing he was a 27-year-old woman named Judy, and Channel 4 has now gone one step further with an all-celebrity series.
Emma Willis took over presenting duties on The Circle last year Channel 4
Taking part are reality TV staples Sam Thompson, Charlotte Crosby and Pete Wicks, while Strictly Come Dancing star Saffron Barker and Drag Race UK finalist Baga Chipz will also be on the show.
Advertisement
Also on the line-up are rapper Lady Leshurr and performer Denise Van Outen, both of whom are currently in training for the upcoming series of Dancing On Ice.
Rounding things off are Blue singer Duncan James and two double acts in the form of Loose Women panellists Kaye Adams and Nadia Sawalha and presenters Melvin Odoom and Rickie Haywood-Williams.
The Celebrity Circle will air in 2021 in aid of Stand Up To Cancer, while a third series of the regular show will also hit our screens later next year.
Emma Willis will be back to host both series, while comedian Sophie Willan will once again serve as narrator.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-12-15--This Is How Loneliness Actually Changes Your Brain

LOADING ERROR LOADING
MRI scans have shown some interesting ways in which loneliness appears to alter the human brain – specifically a part of the brain known as the default network, which is involved in inner thoughts such as reminiscing, future planning, imagination, and thinking about others.
Researchers found the default networks of lonely people were more strongly wired together and that grey matter volume in these regions was greater.
Advertisement
This may be because those who are lonely are more likely to use imagination, memories of the past or hopes for the future to overcome their social isolation.
Generally, greater grey matter volume in the brain signals a greater integrity of the neural circuit, explains Nathan Spreng, the study’s lead author, from The Neuro (the Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital of McGill University). When people learn how to juggle, for example, the grey matter regions of motor cortex – the part of your brain involved in movement and control – increase in size.
Similarly, this new study found the regions of the default network may also grow in size with loneliness.
Advertisement
Jolygon via Getty Images
The default network is known to be involved in social information processing and memory. “Lonely people tend to imagine the social world to a greater degree, as well as imagine and reminisce about social experiences more,” says Spreng. “So, we think that in the absence of social stimulation in the world, the brain is compensating by upregulating these functions of the default network.”
Spreng says this “upregulation” leads to greater grey matter volume and a higher integrity of the fornix, which is the bundle of nerve fibres that carries signals from the hippocampus to the default network.
The study found loneliness correlated with differences in the fornix – in lonely people, the structure of this fibre tract was better preserved. “We do not have direct causal evidence of these changes, but this study does provide suggestive evidence to this effect,” he adds.
The findings were unearthed when Spreng and his co-worker Danilo Bzdok from McGill University in Canada examined MRI scans, genetics and psychological self-assessments of roughly 40,000 middle-aged and older adults from the UK Biobank – an open-access database available to scientists around the world.
They then compared the MRI data of participants who reported often feeling lonely with those who did not.
Advertisement
Researchers said understanding how loneliness manifests in the brain could be key to preventing neurological disease and developing better treatments.
Bzdok, a researcher at The Neuro and the Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute, says: “We are just beginning to understand the impact of loneliness on the brain. Expanding our knowledge in this area will help us to better appreciate the urgency of reducing loneliness in today’s society.”