Based on everything we have heard about Covid, since more-or-less day one of the nightmare, that's totally unsurprising.
The number under 45 who did not have an underlying condition is even smaller, I think.
Looking at the NHS England hospital figures (and the hospital stats should cover pretty well all Covid deaths for people of working age,) the total number of people who had succumbed to Covid-19 in English hospitals, as of the most recent weekly update (21 January,) was 64,111. Of those, 4,717 (7.4% of the total) were under 60, and of that subset only 486 (0.8% of total deaths) were people under 60 and with no known comorbidity.
So, Covid can get anybody, but if you're reasonably fit and below pensionable age then you'd be extraordinarily unlucky actually to die of it.
Boris's hair looked different, cleaner perhaps; maybe he showered immediately before the press conference; not too unlikely if he is taking afternoon naps.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
I can't believe what was posted by some people on the last thread about Handelsblatt. The story is STILL up. The tweets from the journalists are STILL up. They are STILL being spread. This has ALREADY gone around the world. This is INSANELY dangerous.
While not quite as stupid and ignorant as Owls with his placebo remarks last night, anyone playing down Handelsblatt's irresponsibility is being as dumb as ass.
The EMA has now also confirmed that the 8% story was a total lie/error
Surely, someone must get sacked? Or does Germany just tolerate this kind of globally disastrous ineptitude?
Heads should roll on this. I don't know much about the German media and if they all give each other backing or if they're happy on occasion to tear lumps out of each other a la The Guardian and The Mail. You've got to assume The Handelsblatt is diminished in stature and perhaps soon diminished in revenue.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Indeed, and the vast majority of those 1,000 had pre-existing conditions.
This is a disease that preys on the old and infirm.
I wonder if Sumpers would classify them as less valuable lives?
There is also the morbidity of Long Covid, which dies affect the younger. I thought we had estab,ished that on PB months ago - it's not just a matter of the young shrugging it off (albeit at the price of giving it to mum and grandpa and the old lady customer in the shop).
Boris's hair looked different, cleaner perhaps; maybe he showered immediately before the press conference; not too unlikely if he is taking afternoon naps.
If he is more productive and coherent as a result, then excellent, I hope he keeps taking naps.
It would be interesting to have a breakdown by gender, race and BMI. I would imagination a healthy white female under the age of 45 has effectively zero chance of dying from Covid.
Yes, it would be statistically zero. The latest NHS data I have seen (17 Dec 2020, there might be a January update) showed that only 48 (forty-eight) healthy under-40s have died from Covid 19 in England.
There seems to have been no praise whatsoever for AZN.
I think they've done an amazing job. I'll think that even if their vaccine proves flawed.
The other companies with possibly inoculations too. I can't imagine how hard this path has been - I'm sure they loved it mind - but, this is real work, and work to take our hat's off to.
Whatever your views on covid and lockdown, the left's attempt to call a big percentage of these deaths avoidable and down to Johnson is surely pretty disgraceful and I think it will backfire.
But it is true that a big percentage of the deaths that have occurred were avoidable. And it is also true that had Johnson acted differently at various times over the past year many of them would have been avoided. He deserves all the opprobrium that is coming his way. Covid will haunt him for the rest of his life, just as Iraq haunts Blair. The judgement of history will be harsh, and rightly so.
To a limited extent yes.
People also need to take responsibility for their own actions and how their own actions affect others.
Did Johnson compel teenagers to go to house parties? Did Johnson compel young adults to go to raves? Did Johnson compel older adults to go to pub lock ins? Did Johnson compel influencers to go to Dubai for 'work'? Did Johnson compel Piers Moron to go overseas from Tier 3? Did Johnson compel Sky's News team to go on an illegal night out?
Everyone has their role to play in this. You can't outsource your own responsibility to someone else.
As for history, if the UK gets out of this first due to a stunning vaccine success then he could and should be remembered as the PM who made that possible. Despite Sky, Piers Moron, influencers and yes even Cummings.
Teenagers at house parties and the other things you list were, of course, irresponsible. But they did not cause many, if any, of the excess deaths. Most transmission of the virus occurred in care homes, hospitals and, latterly, schools. And much of this arose because of incompetence and dithering by the government in general and Johnson in particular.
You're being ridiculous and clearly have an agenda. The second wave was sparked by people flouting the rules with house parties etc.
Handelsblatt have just published a follow up which doesn't retract their claim but instead muddies the waters by saying that it is an ongoing 'controversy' and cites another unnamed source as saying the effectiveness for older people is small.
Co-authored again by Wachinski, who still has his defence of yesterday's story up on the top of his twitter with no new updates.
Reminds me of the initial denials for this one
Yes, it is possible that Wachinski (and friends) have realised that their mistake is so huge, if they admit it, thy will lose their jobs, and possibly get sued, and maybe even go to jail?
So the only choice (to save their skins) is to brazen it out, yet, still, without providing facts and evidence.
The German Health Ministry needs to make a detailed statement, either confirming or refuting all this: completely.
Twitter is once again full of oldsters panicking that their vaccinations are useless. What a gigantic mess
The Hitler Diaries turned out to be one journalist who had gone loopy. And also corrupt. The Tailwind fiasco was CNN relying on a single journalist who said it had all been double checked. The Bush National Guard records thing relied on a small group of journalists who did the same...
Thankfully in the 21st century people are more vigorous about checking sources before sharing, or copying and pasting other people's material so that could never happen again (!)
Surely the Hitler Diaries were checked. The ST did smell a rat but made the mistake of asking Oxford for an expert opinion.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
Yes.
so far we have had various moves, briefings etc. from the EU & Germany
UK has had the PM saying that he thinks vaccine supplies are secure.
I think that is the right course - not joining in stiring the pot.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Presumably they're going to have to make sure that the 2,000 VC winners weren't at all racist before they build their statues?
On further reading there have been only 1355 VC winners. 164 of them were Jocks, no doubt some of them will be discovered to be drunken wife beaters whose families profited from slavery.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Data or it didn't happen.
If it was true they would have data. No if's, no buts. If they don't, it's not true.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
He's created quite a reputation in the past few weeks. I'm not really sure who he was apart from appearing on France 24 but his re-imagined vaccine rollout map of Europe has become the stuff of legend. Hopefully when the pandemic is over the Lib Dems give him a job designing bar charts.
Handelsblatt have just published a follow up which doesn't retract their claim but instead muddies the waters by saying that it is an ongoing 'controversy' and cites another unnamed source as saying the effectiveness for older people is small.
Co-authored again by Wachinski, who still has his defence of yesterday's story up on the top of his twitter with no new updates.
Reminds me of the initial denials for this one
Yes, it is possible that Wachinski (and friends) have realised that their mistake is so huge, if they admit it, thy will lose their jobs, and possibly get sued, and maybe even go to jail?
So the only choice (to save their skins) is to brazen it out, yet, still, without providing facts and evidence.
The German Health Ministry needs to make a detailed statement, either confirming or refuting all this: completely.
Twitter is once again full of oldsters panicking that their vaccinations are useless. What a gigantic mess
The Hitler Diaries turned out to be one journalist who had gone loopy. And also corrupt. The Tailwind fiasco was CNN relying on a single journalist who said it had all been double checked. The Bush National Guard records thing relied on a small group of journalists who did the same...
Thankfully in the 21st century people are more vigorous about checking sources before sharing, or copying and pasting other people's material so that could never happen again (!)
Surely the Hitler Diaries were checked. The ST did smell a rat but made the mistake of asking Oxford for an expert opinion.
They authenticated them with a sample from the same forger, IIRC.
Based on everything we have heard about Covid, since more-or-less day one of the nightmare, that's totally unsurprising.
The number under 45 who did not have an underlying condition is even smaller, I think.
Looking at the NHS England hospital figures (and the hospital stats should cover pretty well all Covid deaths for people of working age,) the total number of people who had succumbed to Covid-19 in English hospitals, as of the most recent weekly update (21 January,) was 64,111. Of those, 4,717 (7.4% of the total) were under 60, and of that subset only 486 (0.8% of total deaths) were people under 60 and with no known comorbidity.
So, Covid can get anybody, but if you're reasonably fit and below pensionable age then you'd be extraordinarily unlucky actually to die of it.
And yet the sacrifice these people have made, and the privations they have endured, have been great. What's more they will be enduring these privations and making these sacrifices for a long time to come.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
Spot on.
I'm as much of a 'Hardcore Remainer'* as you, but there is simply no doubt that the EU vax scheme is an absolute shambles and that being out of the EU has been helpful in this regard.
(*I now wish the whole thing would just go away, we're out, let's move on)
This is why Covid-19 won't be as serious in poor countries, because they have far fewer older people.
Two generations ago, COVID might have passed through the world unnoticed. One generation barely noticed.
The cohort that it affects most severely hardly existed before, both in terms of age and disability. Most of those people were simply not around for COVID to harvest. A brutal observation but true.
There may well have been similar viruses in the community in the past that mutated into the coronaviruses that circulate as ones that cause the common cold today. We won't know because life expectancy in the UK was, as late as 1900, only 47.
Handelsblatt have just published a follow up which doesn't retract their claim but instead muddies the waters by saying that it is an ongoing 'controversy' and cites another unnamed source as saying the effectiveness for older people is small.
If that's the case then, well... more unidentified sources, still no evidence... sounds suspiciously like they're just trying to excuse the first report by crafting convenient fictions.
It's worse than that, via Google Translate they have actually doubled down in that article:
"A high-ranking official from the Federal Ministry of Health, who had access to the current data situation, told the Handelsblatt: “It is impossible to mix up the numbers. According to the data we have so far, the effectiveness in people over 60 is less than ten percent. ""
So a high up member of the German Health ministry believes the AZ vaccine is almost completely useless in people over 60, and they have data to prove it
This is absolutely explosive, now. Very very serious.
Surely HMG can use diplomatic channels to find out what the German government knows? It seems odd that there has been no slide-by-slide takedown.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
Good riddance to him.
If only the Government had followed Labours advice and ....
Presumably they're going to have to make sure that the 2,000 VC winners weren't at all racist before they build their statues?
On further reading there have been only 1355 VC winners. 164 of them were Jocks, no doubt some of them will be discovered to be drunken wife beaters whose families profited from slavery.
Some of the winners around 1857 will upset a lot of people, for example.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
Good riddance to him.
So lets have a bet then - how soon do you reckon he might go? A tenner at evens. Clearly the longer away you say makes your argument look weak, and yet you stand a better chance to win the tenner.
I wonder when the UK's 30+22m Johnson and Johnson doses are to be delivered.
On the issue of UK production capacity, it appears our 60m Novavax will be produced in the UK, in a facility with a 180m dose/year production capacity.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like it could be a catastrophic error.
Indeed, and the vast majority of those 1,000 had pre-existing conditions.
This is a disease that preys on the old and infirm.
I wonder if Sumpers would classify them as less valuable lives?
There is also the morbidity of Long Covid, which dies affect the younger. I thought we had estab,ished that on PB months ago - it's not just a matter of the young shrugging it off (albeit at the price of giving it to mum and grandpa and the old lady customer in the shop).
I wonder when the UK's 30+22m Johnson and Johnson doses are to be delivered.
On the issue of UK production capacity, it appears our 60m Novavax will be produced in the UK, in a facility with a 180m dose/year production capacity.
The UK J+J vaccine deliveries are supposed to start in April, the same as the EU ones (subject to approval, of course, but it looks as though the UK will be able to approve the vaccine in time for that, if all goes well).
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
It really isn't. Despite some who might like to take it too far it's not like it imperils the soul of the EU to admit they've had problems of their own making.
Boris's hair looked different, cleaner perhaps; maybe he showered immediately before the press conference; not too unlikely if he is taking afternoon naps.
If he is more productive and coherent as a result, then excellent, I hope he keeps taking naps.
Boris started well but faded by the q&a. I'm not convinced he has fully recovered yet but we can take another look tomorrow.
Interesting that the Tories have been attacking "woke identity politics" while at the same time collecting data on voters' ethnic origin and religion, presumably in order to target them with divisive identity politics style messages.
No doubt they'll be tailoring a VC winner statue for every ethnicity and identity. They seemed to have dropped a bollock (as it were) for a rather large section of the population though.
What a load of crap. They aren't discriminating against any VC winner.
That is very "National".
A few Tory MPs and a couple of Ministers endorsing suddenly becomes "WESTMINSTER" in their fevered imagination. It must be draining to always have to be that furious.
Incidentally, a third of VC winners in the last half century are BAME.
This is why Covid-19 won't be as serious in poor countries, because they have far fewer older people.
Two generations ago, COVID might have passed through the world unnoticed. One generation barely noticed.
The cohort that it affects most severely hardly existed before, both in terms of age and disability. Most of those people were simply not around for COVID to harvest. A brutal observation but true.
There may well have been similar viruses in the community in the past that mutated into the coronaviruses that circulate as ones that cause the common cold today. We won't know because life expectancy in the UK was, as late as 1900, only 47.
We will have to face the fact that keeping more and more people alive for longer, whilst admirable and amazing, is going to get ever more expensive and complicated. To the point where it might in some respects be unsupportable.
Covid has thrown down the gauntlet in this respect. That's why blaming people for it is completely unhelpful.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
Spot on.
I'm as much of a 'Hardcore Remainer'* as you, but there is simply no doubt that the EU vax scheme is an absolute shambles and that being out of the EU has been helpful in this regard.
(*I now wish the whole thing would just go away, we're out, let's move on)
I don't think that the EU scheme has been a shambles. simply slow, relative to others. The delays in production have hit just about all the vaccines I can think of.
Much as the roll outs in other countries are not especially slow for vaccine distribution in normal times. Many seem to have simply handed the vaccine to their national healthcare systems. and assumed that vaccination would follow.
The contrast is large with, say Israel, because an enormous amount of effort went into making the Israeli effort as large and as fast as possible.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
It really isn't. Despite some who might like to take it too far it's not like it imperils the soul of the EU to admit they've had problems of their own making.
Having spent quite a bit of time in Brussels and observing how it operates for work, this is exactly the kind of thing I would absolutely expect the EU to balls up. The UK government has done well. Given how abject it has been otherwise, I am genuinely surprised. But it has and it is entirely churlish - and utterly ridiculous - to claim otherwise. It's a genuine feather in Johnson's cap.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
I think that's a somewhat harsh view of what people have been doing. Obviously people hope it is not true, but there have been several strong denials issued and when making a very bold claim it is incumbent on the people making the claim to prove it, so being sceptical given the denials and lack of evidence is not being indignant.
And if it is one of those 'not proven' things on which regulators may come to different conclusions, that doesn't seem to align with the reported nature of the paper's original splash which was apparently (I do not read German) that there was 8% efficacy, which seems a much stronger claim than that there are concerns and regulators may be more cautious than another.
So that doesn't seem to speak well of their reporting even if the actual decision that is made is the one they speculated it would be, if the reason for that decision is not the stark 'it does not work' that was reported.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Don't you think it's the journalists who should have "held fire for now" before spreading seriously dangerous anti-vax stuff?
Interesting that the Tories have been attacking "woke identity politics" while at the same time collecting data on voters' ethnic origin and religion, presumably in order to target them with divisive identity politics style messages.
No doubt they'll be tailoring a VC winner statue for every ethnicity and identity. They seemed to have dropped a bollock (as it were) for a rather large section of the population though.
What a load of crap. They aren't discriminating against any VC winner.
That is very "National".
A few Tory MPs and a couple of Ministers endorsing suddenly becomes "WESTMINSTER" in their fevered imagination. It must be draining to always have to be that furious.
Incidentally, a third of VC winners in the last half century are BAME.
That is, 2 from 6 .
And the plan apparently includes the GC winners, some of whom were women.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Agreed. It is deeply worrying. If it is true it will be the worst news since the new variant: maybe worse than that
One of THE vaccines does not work for the main group it targets
It means the entire British vaccine policy is demolished, and we will have to go back and revaccinate millions of old people with Pfizer (if we can get it). It means we are set back by months. It means so many bad things.
As someone else has said, surely HMG is right now on the phone to Berlin, demanding to see this "data" immediately. This is not a sex scandal you can hush up. This is the health of the world. Total transparency NOW
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like it could be a catastrophic error.
Watergate was a story about a crime linked to the president and his advisers. That sort of thing is always going to be dubious with lots of questions about who knew what and when.
This is a story about the efficacy of a peer-reviewed vaccine. It's materially different.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
Good riddance to him.
You can't blame Johnson for the fact that we have a combination of the following factors in the UK: one of the highest population densities in the world, large elderly population, high levels of obesity, large numbers of people arriving and leaving from all over the world. All of those were already the case before he became PM.
Presumably they're going to have to make sure that the 2,000 VC winners weren't at all racist before they build their statues?
On further reading there have been only 1355 VC winners. 164 of them were Jocks, no doubt some of them will be discovered to be drunken wife beaters whose families profited from slavery.
Some of the winners around 1857 will upset a lot of people, for example.
'He was extremely brave even if he did tie a couple of dozen sepoys to cannon mouths.'
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
any where with a low midge count.
I'd say close to the coast, perhaps West if you are a gardener, with prevailing wind to help with midges maybe.
The place where Boris went on holiday looked good.
Or a lot of people move to the Islands to build a house. If you want to build it is much easier in open country in Scotland than England and plots are reasonable prices, but the authorities tend to be quite precious about their foursquare windows in one and half stories, at least in the country.
Large areas of Scotland still have light traffic, so road cycling is quite practical.
If it works like around here, then you want eg former pit railways or similar for cycle trails.
Perth strikes me as lovely. Big enough to be interesting, small enough to escape. Close to the Highlands and close enough to the central belt. It is a lovely medium sized town. Top choice for me if I moved above the border.
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
any where with a low midge count.
I'd say close to the coast, perhaps West if you are a gardener, with prevailing wind to help with midges maybe.
The place where Boris went on holiday looked good.
Or a lot of people move to the Islands to build a house. If you want to build it is much easier in open country in Scotland than England and plots are reasonable prices, but the authorities tend to be quite precious about their foursquare windows in one and half stories, at least in the country.
Large areas of Scotland still have light traffic, so road cycling is quite practical.
If it works like around here, then you want eg former pit railways or similar for cycle trails.
Perth strikes me as lovely. Big enough to be interesting, small enough to escape. Close to the Highlands and close enough to the central belt. It is a lovely medium sized town. Top choice for me if I moved above the border.
Pitlochry would be a better choice in that region of Scotland
Pitgrockly is full of tourist coaches, tat shops and caravans. Avoid.
Perth is fine. It even has some culture, although not all parts are great and it has expanded significantly in the last 20 years. Avoid anywhere on the flood plain (obviously).
Aberfeldy is better than Pitgrockly but you have to share it with Ms Rowling.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Agreed. It is deeply worrying. If it is true it will be the worst news since the new variant: maybe worse than that
One of THE vaccines does not work for the main group it targets
It means the entire British vaccine policy is demolished, and we will have to go back and revaccinate millions of old people with Pfizer (if we can get it). It means we are set back by months. It means so many bad things.
As someone else has said, surely HMG is right now on the phone to Berlin, demanding to see this "data" immediately. This is not a sex scandal you can hush up. This is the health of the world. Total transparency NOW
Tbh, it's put up or shut up time for the newspaper. Summon the German ambassador and make it clear that this kind of fake news peddling won't be tolerated.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to make a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
This is why Covid-19 won't be as serious in poor countries, because they have far fewer older people.
Two generations ago, COVID might have passed through the world unnoticed. One generation barely noticed.
The cohort that it affects most severely hardly existed before, both in terms of age and disability. Most of those people were simply not around for COVID to harvest. A brutal observation but true.
That's fundamentally not true.
A couple of generations ago we did not have the medical knowledge and technology that is being used in hospitals to keep younger people who have been hospitalised alive.
If Covid had struck us many decades ago the fatality rate would have been much higher. This is why preventing the hospitals from being overwhelmed is such a big deal.
Funnily enough he doesn’t mention that 1) the U.K. agreed a deal with AstraZeneca 3 months before the EU did, 2) The U.K. has spent 7 times more per capita securing supply than the EU 3) the U.K. also had vaccine supply shortfall at start up and 4) the EMA has still yet to approve the vaccine.
Why can't people just accept that the EU has massively buggered this up and the UK government has actually got something right for once? It's really not very hard.
Spot on.
I'm as much of a 'Hardcore Remainer'* as you, but there is simply no doubt that the EU vax scheme is an absolute shambles and that being out of the EU has been helpful in this regard.
(*I now wish the whole thing would just go away, we're out, let's move on)
I don't think that the EU scheme has been a shambles. simply slow, relative to others. The delays in production have hit just about all the vaccines I can think of.
Much as the roll outs in other countries are not especially slow for vaccine distribution in normal times. Many seem to have simply handed the vaccine to their national healthcare systems. and assumed that vaccination would follow.
The contrast is large with, say Israel, because an enormous amount of effort went into making the Israeli effort as large and as fast as possible.
It's interesting that Israel signed a contract with Pfizer the same week the EU did back in November. This was 5 months after the UK did the same. However Israel ordered 8 million doses and the EU 300 million. These procurement announcements didn't gain a whole load of MSM traction last year but in retrospect it seems crazy that the EU left a humungous order so late in the day. The money they saved from bulk buying and haggling is a drop in the ocean compared to the loss of GDP from the extra months of lockdown they will endure. It's a huge balls up.
Whatever your views on covid and lockdown, the left's attempt to call a big percentage of these deaths avoidable and down to Johnson is surely pretty disgraceful and I think it will backfire.
But it is true that a big percentage of the deaths that have occurred were avoidable. And it is also true that had Johnson acted differently at various times over the past year many of them would have been avoided. He deserves all the opprobrium that is coming his way. Covid will haunt him for the rest of his life, just as Iraq haunts Blair. The judgement of history will be harsh, and rightly so.
To a limited extent yes.
People also need to take responsibility for their own actions and how their own actions affect others.
Did Johnson compel teenagers to go to house parties? Did Johnson compel young adults to go to raves? Did Johnson compel older adults to go to pub lock ins? Did Johnson compel influencers to go to Dubai for 'work'? Did Johnson compel Piers Moron to go overseas from Tier 3? Did Johnson compel Sky's News team to go on an illegal night out?
Everyone has their role to play in this. You can't outsource your own responsibility to someone else.
As for history, if the UK gets out of this first due to a stunning vaccine success then he could and should be remembered as the PM who made that possible. Despite Sky, Piers Moron, influencers and yes even Cummings.
Teenagers at house parties and the other things you list were, of course, irresponsible. But they did not cause many, if any, of the excess deaths. Most transmission of the virus occurred in care homes, hospitals and, latterly, schools. And much of this arose because of incompetence and dithering by the government in general and Johnson in particular.
How do you know?
The major spike in Nottingham was caused by First Year Students letting themselves off the leash, for example - though I have not looked up if there was a corresponding spike in deaths.
Presumably they're going to have to make sure that the 2,000 VC winners weren't at all racist before they build their statues?
On further reading there have been only 1355 VC winners. 164 of them were Jocks, no doubt some of them will be discovered to be drunken wife beaters whose families profited from slavery.
Some of the winners around 1857 will upset a lot of people, for example.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to make a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
If you are right then Handellsblatt should be closed down, and the journalists jailed. Seriously.
This is why Covid-19 won't be as serious in poor countries, because they have far fewer older people.
Two generations ago, COVID might have passed through the world unnoticed. One generation barely noticed.
The cohort that it affects most severely hardly existed before, both in terms of age and disability. Most of those people were simply not around for COVID to harvest. A brutal observation but true.
There may well have been similar viruses in the community in the past that mutated into the coronaviruses that circulate as ones that cause the common cold today. We won't know because life expectancy in the UK was, as late as 1900, only 47.
We will have to face the fact that keeping more and more people alive for longer, whilst admirable and amazing, is going to get ever more expensive and complicated. To the point where it might in some respects be unsupportable.
Covid has thrown down the gauntlet in this respect. That's why blaming people for it is completely unhelpful.
The debate in the US (and I presume elsewhere) on allowing the elderly and their immediate families to discuss 'death with dignity' and on their own terms started well before COVID. I guess Living Wills are a first step in that direction, but I think there is a long way to go.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
It’s reasonable to have concerns about the efficacy in over 55 (note not over 65) as the trial data was not perfect. There was speculation about the mhra only approving for under 65, but in the end the totality of the data convinced them, including the phase II results (actual measured immunity). I could believe there is such a discussion going on, and a conflation has happened, leading to this current cock up.
Whatever your views on covid and lockdown, the left's attempt to call a big percentage of these deaths avoidable and down to Johnson is surely pretty disgraceful and I think it will backfire.
But it is true that a big percentage of the deaths that have occurred were avoidable. And it is also true that had Johnson acted differently at various times over the past year many of them would have been avoided. He deserves all the opprobrium that is coming his way. Covid will haunt him for the rest of his life, just as Iraq haunts Blair. The judgement of history will be harsh, and rightly so.
To a limited extent yes.
People also need to take responsibility for their own actions and how their own actions affect others.
Did Johnson compel teenagers to go to house parties? Did Johnson compel young adults to go to raves? Did Johnson compel older adults to go to pub lock ins? Did Johnson compel influencers to go to Dubai for 'work'? Did Johnson compel Piers Moron to go overseas from Tier 3? Did Johnson compel Sky's News team to go on an illegal night out?
Everyone has their role to play in this. You can't outsource your own responsibility to someone else.
As for history, if the UK gets out of this first due to a stunning vaccine success then he could and should be remembered as the PM who made that possible. Despite Sky, Piers Moron, influencers and yes even Cummings.
Teenagers at house parties and the other things you list were, of course, irresponsible. But they did not cause many, if any, of the excess deaths. Most transmission of the virus occurred in care homes, hospitals and, latterly, schools. And much of this arose because of incompetence and dithering by the government in general and Johnson in particular.
How do you know?
The major spike in Nottingham was caused by First Year Students letting themselves off the leash, for example.
It was obvious that the major october spike was caused by students returning to Halls.
Handelsblatt have just published a follow up which doesn't retract their claim but instead muddies the waters by saying that it is an ongoing 'controversy' and cites another unnamed source as saying the effectiveness for older people is small.
Co-authored again by Wachinski, who still has his defence of yesterday's story up on the top of his twitter with no new updates.
Reminds me of the initial denials for this one
Yes, it is possible that Wachinski (and friends) have realised that their mistake is so huge, if they admit it, thy will lose their jobs, and possibly get sued, and maybe even go to jail?
So the only choice (to save their skins) is to brazen it out, yet, still, without providing facts and evidence.
The German Health Ministry needs to make a detailed statement, either confirming or refuting all this: completely.
Twitter is once again full of oldsters panicking that their vaccinations are useless. What a gigantic mess
The Hitler Diaries turned out to be one journalist who had gone loopy. And also corrupt. The Tailwind fiasco was CNN relying on a single journalist who said it had all been double checked. The Bush National Guard records thing relied on a small group of journalists who did the same...
Thankfully in the 21st century people are more vigorous about checking sources before sharing, or copying and pasting other people's material so that could never happen again (!)
Surely the Hitler Diaries were checked. The ST did smell a rat but made the mistake of asking Oxford for an expert opinion.
Mary Lou McDonald calling for a two-island approach on RTÉ news this evening, to keep Covid out. Can we please make this happen?
Yes please, the CTA should have acted as one from the start wrt border control. We have to secure our common external border with hotel based quarantine for all incoming travellers.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
It’s reasonable to have concerns about the efficacy in over 55 (note not over 65) as the trial data was not perfect. There was speculation about the mhra only approving for under 65, but in the end the totality of the data convinced them, including the phase II results (actual measured immunity). I could believe there is such a discussion going on, and a conflation has happened, leading to this current cock up.
But where does this 8% and "under 10%" figure come from? Either it is "true", and in some data somewhere, or someone is lying in the most serious way
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Don't you think it's the journalists who should have "held fire for now" before spreading seriously dangerous anti-vax stuff?
Especially since 'we should know in a few days'. Why is a 'very dull paper' running very inflammatory stories in desperation to get the first scoop, if everyone now has to wait to pontificate about it?
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
That's the key point. Until a large enough number of the elderly are vaccinated we won't know for sure, and the people who will know first are the UK health authorities.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to make a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
The thing is, if they were quoting "near zero" or "low" effectiveness, that would be one thing. Their claim seems to be very specifically 8%, which is going to need a source, either in the published trial data or in the submission to the EMA. And so far, the only candidate for that number is the proportion of people in the cohort of interest in the trial.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Don't you think it's the journalists who should have "held fire for now" before spreading seriously dangerous anti-vax stuff?
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
I'd be very surprised if Johnson survives as leader much beyond early summer. When things start to return to normal there are going to be questions to answer for his appalling mismanagement. The worst number in Europe and one of the worst in the world.
Good riddance to him.
You can't blame Johnson for the fact that we have a combination of the following factors in the UK: one of the highest population densities in the world, large elderly population, high levels of obesity, large numbers of people arriving and leaving from all over the world. All of those were already the case before he became PM.
As I am fond of saying, probably to the irritation of others, multiple things can be true at the same time.
It could be that as a result of various factors outside Boris's control the UK was particularly susceptible, and that he has made a mess of the response.
Given the situation in Western Europe I'm sympathetic to the explanation that the UK, along with other big European nations, had unavoidable factors which contributed to us being hit hard. But it does also seem likely that we will end up with one of the very worst tallies in the world, and I'm not convinced unavoidable factors fully explains that.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
any where with a low midge count.
I'd say close to the coast, perhaps West if you are a gardener, with prevailing wind to help with midges maybe.
The place where Boris went on holiday looked good.
Or a lot of people move to the Islands to build a house. If you want to build it is much easier in open country in Scotland than England and plots are reasonable prices, but the authorities tend to be quite precious about their foursquare windows in one and half stories, at least in the country.
Large areas of Scotland still have light traffic, so road cycling is quite practical.
If it works like around here, then you want eg former pit railways or similar for cycle trails.
Perth strikes me as lovely. Big enough to be interesting, small enough to escape. Close to the Highlands and close enough to the central belt. It is a lovely medium sized town. Top choice for me if I moved above the border.
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
any where with a low midge count.
I'd say close to the coast, perhaps West if you are a gardener, with prevailing wind to help with midges maybe.
The place where Boris went on holiday looked good.
Or a lot of people move to the Islands to build a house. If you want to build it is much easier in open country in Scotland than England and plots are reasonable prices, but the authorities tend to be quite precious about their foursquare windows in one and half stories, at least in the country.
Large areas of Scotland still have light traffic, so road cycling is quite practical.
If it works like around here, then you want eg former pit railways or similar for cycle trails.
Perth strikes me as lovely. Big enough to be interesting, small enough to escape. Close to the Highlands and close enough to the central belt. It is a lovely medium sized town. Top choice for me if I moved above the border.
Pitlochry would be a better choice in that region of Scotland
Pitgrockly is full of tourist coaches, tat shops and caravans. Avoid.
Perth is fine. It even has some culture, although not all parts are great and it has expanded significantly in the last 20 years. Avoid anywhere on the flood plain (obviously).
Aberfeldy is better than Pitgrockly but you have to share it with Ms Rowling.
Flatlander, don't you think it ironic that you are advising MB to avoid the flatlands (and presumably flatlanders)?
This is why Covid-19 won't be as serious in poor countries, because they have far fewer older people.
Two generations ago, COVID might have passed through the world unnoticed. One generation barely noticed.
The cohort that it affects most severely hardly existed before, both in terms of age and disability. Most of those people were simply not around for COVID to harvest. A brutal observation but true.
That's fundamentally not true.
A couple of generations ago we did not have the medical knowledge and technology that is being used in hospitals to keep younger people who have been hospitalised alive.
If Covid had struck us many decades ago the fatality rate would have been much higher. This is why preventing the hospitals from being overwhelmed is such a big deal.
We also did not have the technology or produce the wealth to support people of any age with underlying conditions. Those people mostly simply passed, sadly.
The people who covid targets, both old and younger, did not exist two generations ago. They couldn't.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
Then make the data public so everyone can see it. It's put up or shut up time.
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
I have a keen cyclist friend who lives in Helensburgh. Sometimes cycled to work in Glasgow city centre, almost entirely on cycle tracks. Only a few miles from Loch Lomond.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
Then make the data public so everyone can see it. It's put up or shut up time.
Yes. Especially as it is gaining credence again. This is nightmarish. Just give us the sources and the data, you can't fanny about with global bloody health
My mate is being jabbed tomorrow, as is his wife. He has three quarters of an hour to drive the seven or eight miles between the two vaccination centres. #BorisLocalBikeRide
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
Then make the data public so everyone can see it. It's put up or shut up time.
Yes. Obviously everyone would be hugely disappointed and worried if it is accurate, but people need to know - if the story was important enough to break, it was important enough to include the proof along with it, and the journalists had no reason to break only half a story by publishing a claim on its own.
Ok, I'm not a journalists, but some stories you surely need to rely on more than your source's word, even if they are a really good source?
Brexit Bin 🇪🇺 #BrexitReality @BrexitBin Veteran Remainer 🇪🇺 Lives in Germany & GB. Tweets about the #Brexit utopia of #Gammonopolis *Non Partisan* I block Bots•Trolls•Brexidiots•Lexidiots•Covidiots EU & GammonopolisJoined September 2016 26.3K Following 57.1K Followers
Brexit Bin 🇪🇺 #BrexitReality @BrexitBin Veteran Remainer 🇪🇺 Lives in Germany & GB. Tweets about the #Brexit utopia of #Gammonopolis *Non Partisan* I block Bots•Trolls•Brexidiots•Lexidiots•Covidiots EU & GammonopolisJoined September 2016 26.3K Following 57.1K Followers
Handelsblatt have just published a follow up which doesn't retract their claim but instead muddies the waters by saying that it is an ongoing 'controversy' and cites another unnamed source as saying the effectiveness for older people is small.
Co-authored again by Wachinski, who still has his defence of yesterday's story up on the top of his twitter with no new updates.
Reminds me of the initial denials for this one
Yes, it is possible that Wachinski (and friends) have realised that their mistake is so huge, if they admit it, thy will lose their jobs, and possibly get sued, and maybe even go to jail?
So the only choice (to save their skins) is to brazen it out, yet, still, without providing facts and evidence.
The German Health Ministry needs to make a detailed statement, either confirming or refuting all this: completely.
Twitter is once again full of oldsters panicking that their vaccinations are useless. What a gigantic mess
The Hitler Diaries turned out to be one journalist who had gone loopy. And also corrupt. The Tailwind fiasco was CNN relying on a single journalist who said it had all been double checked. The Bush National Guard records thing relied on a small group of journalists who did the same...
Thankfully in the 21st century people are more vigorous about checking sources before sharing, or copying and pasting other people's material so that could never happen again (!)
Surely the Hitler Diaries were checked. The ST did smell a rat but made the mistake of asking Oxford for an expert opinion.
Lord Day-Care!
One amusing aspect of :"authentication" of totally (and obviously) fake "Hitler Diaries" by Dr. Hugh Trevor-Roper aka Lore Dacre, is that his lordship had just a few years before authored a biography of another con-artist, namely "Hermit of Peking: The Hidden Life of Sir Edmund Backhouse".
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to make a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
If you are right then Handellsblatt should be closed down, and the journalists jailed. Seriously.
No. Free speech includes the freedom to be wrong.
It is easy to be tolerant of views you agree with.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
That's the key point. Until a large enough number of the elderly are vaccinated we won't know for sure, and the people who will know first are the UK health authorities.
Indeed. The OxAZ vaccine came into service in the UK on, I believe, January 4th. Thus, allowing for three weeks for immunity to build and another few days for anybody who catches the disease after that to get sick enough to dial 999, the authorities should be looking out like a hawk for the vaccination status of every pensioner arriving in hospital with Covid from about the start of February.
Should be possible to crunch the numbers after another couple of weeks, determine whether or not the vaccine has done any good, and if so exactly how much.
I'm going to move to Scotland. Decision made today. I don't have any particular region in mind, though, so would love your input on locations to help me narrow things down.
Easy access to the highlands is a must, so I'm ruling out Borders/Dumfries/Ayrshire. I like to cycle a bit, so if there's any place with lots of long-distance cycle paths that would be great. Things like segregated cycle ways next to dual carriageways are fine but I don't want to be forced to wobble along the kerb of a narrow 60mph road. I don't really need much access to cities since I work from home and I'm more into books than theatre. I'm fine with the wind and rain and dark winters and midges. Connectivity in terms of broadband is important, and in terms of parcel delivery without having to pay extra is a nice to have (not sure if that is an issue any more?)
Anything else I haven't mentioned that I should be thinking about?
I'm biased but I'd say the Greater Glasgow area is best for the highlands, several pleasant wee towns north of Glasgow that are literally less than an hour from the highlands proper. I believe cycle routes are getting more and more developed but I haven't done much being a lazy barsteward, and none at all since my bike was nicked. Pretty sure broadband would be ok in that area but it definitely drops off the farther north and west you go.
I have a keen cyclist friend who lives in Helensburgh. Sometimes cycled to work in Glasgow city centre, almost entirely on cycle tracks. Only a few miles from Loch Lomond.
Before relocating to the tranquil Scottish Highlands, I'd check @Dura_Ace's intelligence from the previous thread that half the RAF is moving there too.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
Then make the data public so everyone can see it. It's put up or shut up time.
Yes. Obviously everyone would be hugely disappointed and worried if it is accurate, but people need to know - if the story was important enough to break, it was important enough to include the proof along with it, and the journalists had no reason to break only half a story by publishing a claim on its own.
Well that's the thing, if they have this data then the world does need to see it so AZ can run a new trial and reformulate it to make it more effective before the SII makes its billion or so doses over the next six months.
The newspaper has coincidentally picked the most damaging way to hurt the UK vaccine effort by undermining the one we have most of which the Germans don't have yet. There is definitely an element of "screw you" in this coming from Germany, at least if no data is forthcoming. As I said, it's time to summon the German ambassador and make him answer for these highly damaging leaks coming out of his government.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to make a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
If you are right then Handellsblatt should be closed down, and the journalists jailed. Seriously.
No. Free speech includes the freedom to be wrong.
It is easy to be tolerant of views you agree with.
Recklessly wrong information which may harm people, if that is what has happened, is not the sort of thing that seems covered by that statement.
I don't say the paper should be shut down or jailed, but the idea free speech means no consequences if someone says something which may have had that effect through recklessness, does not seem reasonable.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
It's all very All the President's Men. In the end Ben Bradlee had to make a call on how much he trusted Bernstein and Woodward and their sources. He got it right. It could just be the Handelsblatt reporter has a great track record, has broken huge stories before and is insisting that his sources are impeccable. The editor has decided to trust him/her. It looks like a catastrophic error.
Well quite. It all keeps coming back to where this data upon which the near zero efficacy claim is based has come from. Insofar as I'm aware, the only data available by which the efficacy of this vaccine may presently be determined is clinical trial data that is or has already been picked over by the relevant regulators, and the publicly disclosed summary of that tells us the same thing that reputable figures such as Vallance have also been telling us. There is no efficacy value available for older patients, because the trial didn't contain a large enough number of them to makNo. Ie a statistically valid determination; the assumption that the vaccine will be effective in older people therefore rests on the observation of similar immune responses in all age cohorts, and nobody in either British or German officialdom appears to be casting serious doubt on this - except for Handelsblatt's anonymous sources, who claim to have the smoking gun but won't produce it.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
If you are right then Handellsblatt should be closed down, and the journalists jailed. Seriously.
No. Free speech includes the freedom to be wrong.
It is easy to be tolerant of views you agree with.
No. IF Handelsblatt is wrong this is the exact equivalent of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, the classic example where Free Speech does not apply
The British government has to pressure the German government: who need to Show The Data - if it exists
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Don't you think it's the journalists who should have "held fire for now" before spreading seriously dangerous anti-vax stuff?
Especially since 'we should know in a few days'. Why is a 'very dull paper' running very inflammatory stories in desperation to get the first scoop, if everyone now has to wait to pontificate about it?
There is a deeply worrying coalition developing on PB of those prone to attention-grabbing hysteria and those prone to apathetic sanguinity.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
I tend to agree. But I am not 100% sure. Handelsblatt IS a respected paper. Like the FT. They will know the personal and global consequences if they've got this wrong. It is not the Daily Express.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
Single, un-named source, no data presented (or even seen by the journo), it’s not correct. Don’t get fooled by the bullshit. The mhra are not idiots, and have seen all the trial data, and authorised for use. That’s enough for me.
The MHRA authorised for use because its better than nothing and we are in the middle of a crisis here in the UK.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
Then make the data public so everyone can see it. It's put up or shut up time.
Yes. Obviously everyone would be hugely disappointed and worried if it is accurate, but people need to know - if the story was important enough to break, it was important enough to include the proof along with it, and the journalists had no reason to break only half a story by publishing a claim on its own.
Ok, I'm not a journalists, but some stories you surely need to rely on more than your source's word, even if they are a really good source?
Ideally the data would be made public but I guess for the Germans and the EMA this is an academic exercise as no one there has had the jab. In the UK its much more pressing as so much has been used.
Presumably they're going to have to make sure that the 2,000 VC winners weren't at all racist before they build their statues?
On further reading there have been only 1355 VC winners. 164 of them were Jocks, no doubt some of them will be discovered to be drunken wife beaters whose families profited from slavery.
Some of the winners around 1857 will upset a lot of people, for example.
'He was extremely brave even if he did tie a couple of dozen sepoys to cannon mouths.'
The Sepp Dietrich argument.
If they wished to be properly elitist, as they should, they could start with the winners of the Victoria Cross and Bar - all three of them. Two of the three being medics who saved their fellows' lives while under heavy fire, the inhuman brutes.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
Don't you think it's the journalists who should have "held fire for now" before spreading seriously dangerous anti-vax stuff?
Especially since 'we should know in a few days'. Why is a 'very dull paper' running very inflammatory stories in desperation to get the first scoop, if everyone now has to wait to pontificate about it?
There is a deeply worrying coalition developing on PB of those prone to attention-grabbing hysteria and those prone to apathetic sanguinity.
'Apathatic sanguinity' is a cool phrase, I may steal it.
One thing I don't look forward to is, if the reporting is shown to be correct, various people act as though no one was prepared to accept it, when while most don't want to think it true, the level of reaction is because its an incendiary claim made without evidence.
They'll be winning a prize for dogged reporting, or condemnation.
It does give more detail than before - they say that the Minister is specifically considering whether to target younger people with the AZ medicine because of the concerns, and that two State governments have been alerted for a discussion on Saturday on whether to rethink prioritisation accordingly. The Health Ministry has not denied the report, they've said it's "speculation", which is standard politician-speak for "We've not yet decided".
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
It’s reasonable to have concerns about the efficacy in over 55 (note not over 65) as the trial data was not perfect. There was speculation about the mhra only approving for under 65, but in the end the totality of the data convinced them, including the phase II results (actual measured immunity). I could believe there is such a discussion going on, and a conflation has happened, leading to this current cock up.
But where does this 8% and "under 10%" figure come from? Either it is "true", and in some data somewhere, or someone is lying in the most serious way
"Beamte suffer from an image problem in Germany. A study conducted by the German Civil Service Federation (DBB) concluded that 61% of the German population thought Beamte to be "lazy, lethargic, inflexible, stubborn or corrupt". Other common points of contention, among the German public, are that Beamte are paid excessive salaries and cannot be removed from their positions for any reason other than engaging in serious criminal conduct or being incapacitated."
Comments
So, Covid can get anybody, but if you're reasonably fit and below pensionable age then you'd be extraordinarily unlucky actually to die of it.
Any journalist worth their salt sharing a story like this should have seen the data. They're making it clear they haven't.
This is gossip. Uninformed, unintelligent, dangerous, antivax gossip. Not reporting of scientific data.
So moving at the speed of the slowest most incompetent should be what we all aspire to? (and sod the deaths)
I think they've done an amazing job. I'll think that even if their vaccine proves flawed.
The other companies with possibly inoculations too. I can't imagine how hard this path has been - I'm sure they loved it mind - but, this is real work, and work to take our hat's off to.
so far we have had various moves, briefings etc. from the EU & Germany
UK has had the PM saying that he thinks vaccine supplies are secure.
I think that is the right course - not joining in stiring the pot.
The reference to Bild to back them up makes me think it is desperate bullshit. But the reference to the health official with data being so explicit (virtually no efficacy in over 60s) does give me pause.
If it is true - IF IF IF IF - it is a calamity. Especially for the UK, but also the world in general.
If it was true they would have data. No if's, no buts. If they don't, it's not true.
Good riddance to him.
I'm as much of a 'Hardcore Remainer'* as you, but there is simply no doubt that the EU vax scheme is an absolute shambles and that being out of the EU has been helpful in this regard.
(*I now wish the whole thing would just go away, we're out, let's move on)
Shut zoos.......................................
Just choose your line.
On the issue of UK production capacity, it appears our 60m Novavax will be produced in the UK, in a facility with a 180m dose/year production capacity.
Frankly I think we don't know yet, and because we don't want it to be true, we're indignantly rubbishing it. We should know within a few days, so I'd hold fire for now. It's possible that it's one of those "not proven" things on which different regulators may honestly come to different conclusions. Or it may be simply that one individual civil servant has taken an outlying position. I don't think Handlesblatt has just made it up - they are a very dull paper, not at all given to shock-horror stories.
A few Tory MPs and a couple of Ministers endorsing suddenly becomes "WESTMINSTER" in their fevered imagination. It must be draining to always have to be that furious.
Incidentally, a third of VC winners in the last half century are BAME.
That is, 2 from 6
Covid has thrown down the gauntlet in this respect. That's why blaming people for it is completely unhelpful.
Much as the roll outs in other countries are not especially slow for vaccine distribution in normal times. Many seem to have simply handed the vaccine to their national healthcare systems. and assumed that vaccination would follow.
The contrast is large with, say Israel, because an enormous amount of effort went into making the Israeli effort as large and as fast as possible.
And if it is one of those 'not proven' things on which regulators may come to different conclusions, that doesn't seem to align with the reported nature of the paper's original splash which was apparently (I do not read German) that there was 8% efficacy, which seems a much stronger claim than that there are concerns and regulators may be more cautious than another.
So that doesn't seem to speak well of their reporting even if the actual decision that is made is the one they speculated it would be, if the reason for that decision is not the stark 'it does not work' that was reported.
One of THE vaccines does not work for the main group it targets
It means the entire British vaccine policy is demolished, and we will have to go back and revaccinate millions of old people with Pfizer (if we can get it). It means we are set back by months. It means so many bad things.
As someone else has said, surely HMG is right now on the phone to Berlin, demanding to see this "data" immediately. This is not a sex scandal you can hush up. This is the health of the world. Total transparency NOW
This is a story about the efficacy of a peer-reviewed vaccine. It's materially different.
The Sepp Dietrich argument.
Perth is fine. It even has some culture, although not all parts are great and it has expanded significantly in the last 20 years. Avoid anywhere on the flood plain (obviously).
Aberfeldy is better than Pitgrockly but you have to share it with Ms Rowling.
That's because it can't possibly exist. This vaccine hasn't been in use for long enough for the additional information necessary to determine efficacy in older patients to have been gathered.
A couple of generations ago we did not have the medical knowledge and technology that is being used in hospitals to keep younger people who have been hospitalised alive.
If Covid had struck us many decades ago the fatality rate would have been much higher. This is why preventing the hospitals from being overwhelmed is such a big deal.
The major spike in Nottingham was caused by First Year Students letting themselves off the leash, for example - though I have not looked up if there was a corresponding spike in deaths.
All the data the MHRA saw though was too little to come to any conclusion about over 65 efficacy however. Its perfectly possible that there is now additional trial data showing poor response for older people. At that point it becomes sensible to optimise your vaccination a strategy with the best vaccine reserved for those most at risk and the less effective one for everyone else.
It could be that as a result of various factors outside Boris's control the UK was particularly susceptible, and that he has made a mess of the response.
Given the situation in Western Europe I'm sympathetic to the explanation that the UK, along with other big European nations, had unavoidable factors which contributed to us being hit hard. But it does also seem likely that we will end up with one of the very worst tallies in the world, and I'm not convinced unavoidable factors fully explains that.
We also did not have the technology or produce the wealth to support people of any age with underlying conditions. Those people mostly simply passed, sadly.
The people who covid targets, both old and younger, did not exist two generations ago. They couldn't.
https://twitter.com/OlafStorbeck/status/1354142194601488385?s=20
Ok, I'm not a journalists, but some stories you surely need to rely on more than your source's word, even if they are a really good source?
@BrexitBin
Veteran Remainer 🇪🇺 Lives in Germany & GB. Tweets about the #Brexit utopia of #Gammonopolis *Non Partisan* I block Bots•Trolls•Brexidiots•Lexidiots•Covidiots
EU & GammonopolisJoined September 2016
26.3K Following
57.1K Followers
Pretty ironic, eh?
It is easy to be tolerant of views you agree with.
Should be possible to crunch the numbers after another couple of weeks, determine whether or not the vaccine has done any good, and if so exactly how much.
Junior SPAD: You mean...like a clearance?
https://twitter.com/Coldwar_Steve/status/1354135855389093900?s=20
The newspaper has coincidentally picked the most damaging way to hurt the UK vaccine effort by undermining the one we have most of which the Germans don't have yet. There is definitely an element of "screw you" in this coming from Germany, at least if no data is forthcoming. As I said, it's time to summon the German ambassador and make him answer for these highly damaging leaks coming out of his government.
https://twitter.com/anked/status/1354106973290192896
I don't say the paper should be shut down or jailed, but the idea free speech means no consequences if someone says something which may have had that effect through recklessness, does not seem reasonable.
The British government has to pressure the German government: who need to Show The Data - if it exists
One thing I don't look forward to is, if the reporting is shown to be correct, various people act as though no one was prepared to accept it, when while most don't want to think it true, the level of reaction is because its an incendiary claim made without evidence.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beamter:
"Beamte suffer from an image problem in Germany. A study conducted by the German Civil Service Federation (DBB) concluded that 61% of the German population thought Beamte to be "lazy, lethargic, inflexible, stubborn or corrupt". Other common points of contention, among the German public, are that Beamte are paid excessive salaries and cannot be removed from their positions for any reason other than engaging in serious criminal conduct or being incapacitated."