That is truly pathetic - as I said, he already knew he was wrong before his last thread. Now he's almost completely erased the whole nub of his previous story. There's no 'separate data' etc.
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
Ha! Just noticed that he "blocks Covidiots"...
I'm assuming that everyone has read the threat quoted from the original journalist, and it seems to me he's walking back his allegations. (Albeit without admitting he's doing so, or altering the original story.)
Specifically, this is no longer a scientific paper or anything concrete, but is now "(unnamed) German officials estimate". That's VERY different framing from the original article, and very different from published AZN figures, which imply 70% or so accuracy (albeit on an incredibly small sample size).
At the very least, the journalist has been negligent in not getting comment from AZN before publishing the paper (something that they should always do). In this case, his attempt to change what he is claiming (without apology or correction) compounds his error.
I don't see how he can keep his job, and I don't see how Handelsblatt avoids an apology.
Also, I don't see how he can avoid either naming some of the German officials, or showing this data with "8%". Journalistic privilege does not apply here. This is a matter of global importance: the world needs to know ASAP
You can't just say "Oh we have the data but we can't reveal it", when millions of lives are at risk, if that data is correct
If he can't reveal this, it becomes no more than criminally irresponsible rumour-mongering.
The German government also denied the story quite emphatically, no?
So: one of three things is the case
1. He made a mistake and is now lying to cover it up 2. The German government wanted to spread disinformation about the vaccine and is now hanging their patsy out to dry 3. A German official made an off the cuff comment, that the journalist blew up into a full scale story
My guess is that (1) is the most likely, simply because he's changed his story. I suspect if it had been (2), he would have said something in the original article like "an analysis performed by the government...". Also, if it's (2), and he's being hung out to dry, then he'll probably end up naming names.
(3) is also a possibility. And it's also possible (3) was semi malicious, by someone who didn't like the Brits.
I have never said that the AZN was 8% effective in the 65+ age group.
I did point out that vaccines are generally less effective in the elderly, and that there were so few over 65's in the published data that we could not say how effective it is in that group. I also said that we would know from real world UK data in about a months time.
He's just an American commentator reading something on twitter and sticking "BREAKING" in front of his interpretation of it.
Just an American commentator?
Eric Feigl-Ding @DrEricDing Epidemiologist & Health Economist. Senior Fellow, FAS. Fmr 16 yrs @Harvard . Health & justice advocate.
He might of course be wrong but the only political positions I have seen him take were anti Trump
He is well qualified but ill informed on something happening the other side of the world, it is not a rare combination at all.
He unsurprisingly dislikes Trump as he is a Democrat politician who has stood for Congress.
Calling Dr. Ding a "politician" is not quite right, in that he is primarily a medico who took a fling at being a politico, running for Congress on platform that focused on public health and universal health care.
Would also like to point out that, unless you want to sound like a highly partisan GOPer, should refer to "DemocratIC politician".
Realize that UK has "Liberal Democrat Party" but in USA we have "Democratic Party" as the historic, legal and conventional moniker.
Note in Canada they have the "New Democratic Party". NOT the New Democrat Party - which frankly (like Liberal Democrat Party) is ungrammatical IMHO.
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
Read the text and direct quotes, not the headlines please!
They are not talking about banning exports, but tracking them with permits.
------
“It's not about ‘EU first’. It's about Europe's fair share,” said Mr Spahn. “That's why I think it would make sense to have a restriction on exports. It would mean that vaccines that leave the EU need a permit, so that at least we know what's produced in Europe, what is leaving Europe, where it's leaving Europe for, and we have a fair distribution.”
------
It is quite clearly not an export ban because he is talking about where the vaccines are being exported to.
The media will call it a ban, not because it is one, but because they know it will create a frenzy and drive advertising and profits.
"restrictions"...... "permits".....
I have a pin if you would like to count the number of angels dancing upon it.....
The question is actually what happens if someone in Berlin decides that it's unfair distribution. No one seems to want to ask/answer that question.
If you think its going to happen my bet offer still stands:
"What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?"
I have never bet and decline your offer but an export ban is just what has been proposed by Germany and according to Euro news has been sent today to the 27 countries by the commission
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
It's that, combined with a vague threat to Pfizer to pull out all the stops re production.
Read the text and direct quotes, not the headlines please!
They are not talking about banning exports, but tracking them with permits.
------
“It's not about ‘EU first’. It's about Europe's fair share,” said Mr Spahn. “That's why I think it would make sense to have a restriction on exports. It would mean that vaccines that leave the EU need a permit, so that at least we know what's produced in Europe, what is leaving Europe, where it's leaving Europe for, and we have a fair distribution.”
------
It is quite clearly not an export ban because he is talking about where the vaccines are being exported to.
The media will call it a ban, not because it is one, but because they know it will create a frenzy and drive advertising and profits.
"restrictions"...... "permits".....
I have a pin if you would like to count the number of angels dancing upon it.....
The question is actually what happens if someone in Berlin decides that it's unfair distribution. No one seems to want to ask/answer that question.
If you think its going to happen my bet offer still stands:
"What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?"
I have never bet and decline your offer but an export ban is just what has been proposed by Germany and according to Euro news has been sent today to the 27 countries by the commission
His bet is a very safe one - the EU could block 90% of all vaccine exports, allowing just a trickle out to save face, something that would have almost the same effect as a blanket ban, and he would still win his bet. Nobody is going to be daft enough to take that bet.
Read the text and direct quotes, not the headlines please!
They are not talking about banning exports, but tracking them with permits.
------
“It's not about ‘EU first’. It's about Europe's fair share,” said Mr Spahn. “That's why I think it would make sense to have a restriction on exports. It would mean that vaccines that leave the EU need a permit, so that at least we know what's produced in Europe, what is leaving Europe, where it's leaving Europe for, and we have a fair distribution.”
------
It is quite clearly not an export ban because he is talking about where the vaccines are being exported to.
The media will call it a ban, not because it is one, but because they know it will create a frenzy and drive advertising and profits.
"restrictions"...... "permits".....
I have a pin if you would like to count the number of angels dancing upon it.....
The question is actually what happens if someone in Berlin decides that it's unfair distribution. No one seems to want to ask/answer that question.
If you think its going to happen my bet offer still stands:
"What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?"
I have never bet and decline your offer but an export ban is just what has been proposed by Germany and according to Euro news has been sent today to the 27 countries by the commission
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
Good news for you then - Rogerdamus made that exact same prediction today, so it's certain to be correct.
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
The whole vaccine story is turning out to be the EUs worse fear - ultimately as a collection of 27 nation states, it constantly needs to justify its benefits, and being outdone on vaccine procurement by the UK isn’t exactly a good look. So when things go wrong, ultimately the insecurity sets in and it doubles down.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Indeed. Sometimes headlines are written by others and overegg claims made in a particular article, but this guy was defending and clarifying the original position, so it doesn't seem like they could rely on a 'the story was less dramatic than the headline' defence.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Absolutely.
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
This has to be fake news about football "fans" in Holland going around in orange jackets "protecting" city centres this evening and that it has kinda been oked by the police..surely fake right?
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
If the effects of the vaccine wear off after a few months, can't he just get a booster dose?
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
Euro news were reporting that MEPs are turning on the commission who have supplied some information to them but heavily redacted
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
It's that, combined with a vague threat to Pfizer to pull out all the stops re production.
They are also meeting AZ again tomorrow, its theatre and pressure, not a ban.
I am still interpreting the EU vaccine monitoring/restriction thing as displacement activity to pre-explain to EU citizens why they are so far behind the UK and US in the global vaccine race.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
It's that, combined with a vague threat to Pfizer to pull out all the stops re production.
The EU cheaped out on funding and now they're bitching about being at the back of the queue. It's been such a disaster for the whole world that the second richest continent by capita wealth decided not to bother with research and production subsidies to avoid a political row over where the money gets spent. We would have been better off if Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and other rich EU countries subsidised their own industries to get manufacturing done domestically, we'd be in a position of oversupply in Europe. Instead the EU derelicted its duty to people of Europe and the world.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Absolutely.
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
A test for the morals of the German press.
I agree. The journalist either needs to name names, or he needs to be fired. And - given the way the story has changed - I think it's probably the latter.
I can't see any backpedalling. If anything, he's sticking to his guns:
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
I’m still not convinced - she might prefer to dine alone, especially if she reads pb...
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Absolutely.
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
A test for the morals of the German press.
He shouldn't be arrested, free speech and all that. People have the right to say bullshit even if it is bullshit, without fear of intimidation and arrest by the state. Yes, even antivaxxers.
This has to be fake news about football "fans" in Holland going around in orange jackets "protecting" city centres this evening and that it has kinda been oked by the police..surely fake right?
Was reported on the BBC last night too.
The yuff are off again tonight. Twitter full of clips of blowing shit up.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Absolutely.
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
A test for the morals of the German press.
He shouldn't be arrested, free speech and all that. People have the right to say bullshit even if it is bullshit, without fear of intimidation and arrest by the state. Yes, even antivaxxers.
He should be sacked.
If approval is given only for under 65s, he will claim vindication even if the actual thrust of the story about efficacy is not stood up.
Who cares what Nelson says, he is only a journalist.
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll and getting Unionists to boycott it is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
I can't see any backpedalling. If anything, he's sticking to his guns:
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
'Questions remained' is pretty weaksauce compared to what was claimed. And seriously, this unnamed senior official is going to be in deep shit if he is not being wholly truthful.
That quote seems to pin it down pretty much on one person, this official, while the journalist can still wriggle out and say the source made a mistake, since they were the one standing by the story, not him.
I'm honestly shocked that Germany of all countries is pushing for export restrictions. Given their economic model becoming a nation that interferes in the ability of companies to export goods seems like a very poor idea. I could understand the French taking a more hard line stance, but to their credit the French seem to be keeping their powder dry for now. I think Macron probably realises putting up export bans would be a long term death knell of the EU having a major pharmaceuticals industry. Companies would have to be based in nations that won't fuck with export contracts for those contracts to have any value for clients.
If the EU does do this countries all over the world will insist that manufacturing takes place in a jurisdiction which won't play these kinds of stupid games. The US receives supply from the Belgian production line, this kind of stuff has the potential to break up the Western post war alliance.
It will also play very VERY badly in America. Pfizer is an American company, America has poured billions into vaccine production. If the EU tries to halt contracted vaccine supplies by an American company to close American allies like the UK or Canada (let alone the USA) then Biden will go ballistic. It will poison EU-USA relations just when the EU wants to repair them. Biden will have to go mad because he will have Trumpite Republicans snarling at him if he doesn't.
For that reason I do not believe it will happen. It is still a remarkably stupid thing for a German politician to even suggest. What's wrong with them?
This - AND the EU have chosen to suck up to China. White House must be wondering what the hell is going on in Brussels?
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
He is not doing too badly in this poll from yesterday v Starmer
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
You do seem to be ignoring the fact that Labour run Wales.
And Wales has a worse death rate per head than England. And a poorer vaccine roll out.
Who cares what Nelson says, he is only a journalist.
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll and getting Unionists to boycott it is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
Who cares what you say, you're not even a journalist.
Read the text and direct quotes, not the headlines please!
They are not talking about banning exports, but tracking them with permits.
------
“It's not about ‘EU first’. It's about Europe's fair share,” said Mr Spahn. “That's why I think it would make sense to have a restriction on exports. It would mean that vaccines that leave the EU need a permit, so that at least we know what's produced in Europe, what is leaving Europe, where it's leaving Europe for, and we have a fair distribution.”
------
It is quite clearly not an export ban because he is talking about where the vaccines are being exported to.
The media will call it a ban, not because it is one, but because they know it will create a frenzy and drive advertising and profits.
"restrictions"...... "permits".....
I have a pin if you would like to count the number of angels dancing upon it.....
The question is actually what happens if someone in Berlin decides that it's unfair distribution. No one seems to want to ask/answer that question.
If you think its going to happen my bet offer still stands:
"What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?"
I have never bet and decline your offer but an export ban is just what has been proposed by Germany and according to Euro news has been sent today to the 27 countries by the commission
Come on, let's put some money on it.
I'll pay £100 to PB if there are no export restrictions on any EU produced vaccine between now and the end of March.
You pay £200 to worthy charity if there are export restrictions on any EU produced vaccine between now and the end of March.
I can't see any backpedalling. If anything, he's sticking to his guns:
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
He's unsuccessfully trying to pass the buck:
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
If it was corroborated then then what are those people saying now? Are they all insisting they got the 8% right? Otherwise is he admitting that he only ever had a single source?
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
A test for the morals of the German press.
The cheerleaders for Wirecard?
That press?
Not just the press, the federal government and BaFin. This is why I think this is a politician trying to undermine "the British vaccine" same as when German politicians and the regulator tried to intimidate the FT and the City Hedgies to protect the German finance industry. Now they are protecting their own reputations.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
Yes, the experts interviewed on R4s retrospective earlier identified the UK government’s slow initial response as the principal explanation for our poor relative performance, with the inability to do effective test and trace as the next. Other key reasons were the age and health profile of the population and the early cock up with care homes. An article on the Guardian website lists the same factors in a different order, and adds the ever changing, confusing regulations. Almost all of this sits with the government directly.
Who cares what Nelson says, he is only a journalist.
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
Some might claim Boris is just a journalist.
Ignoring my flippant comment why is a sample of one (Spain) particularly valid? It didn't prove anything. It is just one example. A sample of say 5 would be an indication, but even that isn't proof.
In much more positive news, the DVD of the final season of The Good Place was released this week. One of my favourite shows of the last decade.
Sure, it could get a bit pretentious at times, but ultimately it was a thoughtful, creative, unpredicable and funny comedy about flawed but likable characters who, unlike in most comedies, actually grew and developed as characters and became better people, not worse people.
Well worth a buy, and already putting a smile back on my face.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
There is very little bitterness towards the government. Sure, if they'd handled this very well, the death toll might be 80,000, rather than 100,000, but those are the parameters of the argument.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
He is not doing too badly in this poll from yesterday v Starmer
I think you may have persuaded me to give it a try!
It is a very hard book to get into. The easiest is probably Player of Games.
His best was Use of Weapons - i like the layers of implication in the ending. Read that and you'll never look at a chair in quite the same way, again.
Use of Weapons is outstandingly good, but you do have to get used to a book that starts in the middle and then goes forward and backward in alternating chapters. There is a very good reason it does this and I'm not going to say anymore for anyone who hasn't read the book.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit ** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Absolutely.
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
A test for the morals of the German press.
I agree. The journalist either needs to name names, or he needs to be fired. And - given the way the story has changed - I think it's probably the latter.
He then wrote another article tripling down, this evening, saying this:
"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 available to us so far, the effectiveness in people over 60 is less than ten percent. "
Now all that certainty has turned into:
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that SUGGESTED efficacy in elderly COULD be at around 8 percent, a POSSIBLE scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
Yes, the experts interviewed on R4s retrospective earlier identified the UK government’s slow initial response as the principal explanation for our poor relative performance, with the inability to do effective test and trace as the next. Other key reasons were the age and health profile of the population and the early cock up with care homes. An article on the Guardian website lists the same factors in a different order, and adds the ever changing, confusing regulations. Almost all of this sits with the government directly.
Are the LibDems in power somewhere, so we can examine their relative performance?
Ah yes, .... they are jointly running the part of the UK with the highest death rate per capita.
Who cares what Nelson says, he is only a journalist.
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll and getting Unionists to boycott it is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
PP haven't proved that. The ends don't justify the means and the Catalan separatists are still there and current opinion polls basically leave it 50/50.
I can't see any backpedalling. If anything, he's sticking to his guns:
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
You don't think that's a backpedal?
'Didn't misread' leaves vast wiggle room - the source may not have read the figures at all. He also reveals here that his '8%' bollocks only came from one of his sources, not multiple, as he said before. And rather than clarify that with 'their calculation is still that efficacy is 8%' etc. etc., he finishes with a weak 'questions remained'.
We went from: -Efficacy is estimated by the German health dept at 8% in over 65s -This is confirmed by multiple sources within the relevant German agency -This is based on previously unseen data, not existing stuff in the public domain
To: -No repetition of the 8% -One source for the 8%, who 'insists he didn't misread' - the other sources merely say there are 'questions' -There is no separate data/report, there are only questions already highlighted, based on the existing data
All that's left of his story is the fact that over 60's were a low percentage of the sample. There's nothing else.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
He is not doing too badly in this poll from yesterday v Starmer
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
You do seem to be ignoring the fact that Labour run Wales.
And Wales has a worse death rate per head than England. And a poorer vaccine roll out.
There's no doubt that the Westminster government have made bad mistakes but they do have successes on getting large scale testing and vaccination done.
I'm not sure what successes the devolved governments have managed beyond Sturgeon being good at press conferences.
I see a lot of tough words on here from some people about penalising certain types of speech especially related to spreading untruths about vaccinations.
I'm not expressing a view on that, but I'd like to know what the difference is between being an antivaxxer and being a climate change denier. To me they seem directly equivalent, and when I think of it in those terms it points me towards having the same view on what should or shouldn't happen to those people.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
Excellent. Perhaps we could hold a show trial for him at the same time as those of Macron, Merkel, Conte, Sánchez and dozens of other world leaders. After all, they also murdered their own people en masse by not miraculously saving them from a novel pathogen, so it wouldn't be right for them to escape justice, would it?
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Hmmm, I'm not sure. He will be followed everywhere he goes by bereaved relatives, it will be impossible for him to move the agenda on. I think Labour and the other opposition parties will turn up the volume when the pandemic is over and how can Johnson defend himself? Everyone, even most Tories, knows he bears a heavy weight of responsibility. The scientists and other insiders - potentially including Cummings - will claim, probably correctly, that he ignored their advice until it was too late. There's really no way forward for him.
Yes, the experts interviewed on R4s retrospective earlier identified the UK government’s slow initial response as the principal explanation for our poor relative performance, with the inability to do effective test and trace as the next. Other key reasons were the age and health profile of the population and the early cock up with care homes. An article on the Guardian website lists the same factors in a different order, and adds the ever changing, confusing regulations. Almost all of this sits with the government directly.
Are the LibDems in power somewhere, so we can examine their relative performance?
Ah yes, .... they are jointly running the part of the UK with the highest death rate per capita.
I don't really think you can pin the 100,000 death statistic on a LD Education Minister in the Sennedd. I agree Drakeford, is responsible, but Kirsty isn't.
I can't see any backpedalling. If anything, he's sticking to his guns:
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
He's unsuccessfully trying to pass the buck:
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
If it was corroborated then then what are those people saying now? Are they all insisting they got the 8% right? Otherwise is he admitting that he only ever had a single source?
The corroboration appears to be that article in Bild (ie the Daily Star) which itself clearly got the story from him. Ludicrous. If he has other voices to support him, who are they?
He's just an American commentator reading something on twitter and sticking "BREAKING" in front of his interpretation of it.
Just an American commentator?
Eric Feigl-Ding @DrEricDing Epidemiologist & Health Economist. Senior Fellow, FAS. Fmr 16 yrs @Harvard . Health & justice advocate.
He might of course be wrong but the only political positions I have seen him take were anti Trump
He is well qualified but ill informed on something happening the other side of the world, it is not a rare combination at all.
He unsurprisingly dislikes Trump as he is a Democrat politician who has stood for Congress.
Calling Dr. Ding a "politician" is not quite right, in that he is primarily a medico who took a fling at being a politico, running for Congress on platform that focused on public health and universal health care.
Would also like to point out that, unless you want to sound like a highly partisan GOPer, should refer to "DemocratIC politician".
Realize that UK has "Liberal Democrat Party" but in USA we have "Democratic Party" as the historic, legal and conventional moniker.
Note in Canada they have the "New Democratic Party". NOT the New Democrat Party - which frankly (like Liberal Democrat Party) is ungrammatical IMHO.
The Democratic Party in its current form is actually older than the Republican Party in its current form. Not sure the Republicans deserve the GOP moniker!
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
Good news for you then - Rogerdamus made that exact same prediction today, so it's certain to be correct.
Does it make him on borrowed time though? Could it not make him more human and simpatico to many? Voters everywhere like authenticity above almost all else. And he does look genuinely sorry.
He could easily have said, "Look, no human, not even a Prime Minister, can stop a pandemic. This is not my responsibility." Instead, he has taken it on his shoulders.
Sure, plenty will blame him. And he and his government have made plenty of mistakes. But I don't see how this particular "Sorry" redounds badly on him.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
Boris might still be Prime Minister in 2024 but he does look done in at the moment and more importantly his brain seems to fog up after a short time. Let us see how PMQs goes Wednesday afternoon.
Putting health to one side, and also money, what is there politically for Boris? Well, being Prime Minister is a nice job with lots of perks and ex officio respect. Hosting the G7 in June means mixing with world leaders, and the new American President is back on board with climate change, Covid and other global issues.
On the minus side, Covid is taking a severe toll on the nation and defies bombast (here and for President Trump) but once we are all vaccinated, it may recede as an issue. Scotland can be kicked into the long grass as suggested weeks ago by Captain Hindsight. Brexit's ructions can be blamed on Covid. And there is no Borisism, no defining project, no underlying political philosophy to keep him in place till it is achieved, unless you count Brexit and that is done.
I really do not know. I cannot see him being forced out but health might do for him, or money.
I suspect he is at last beginning to appreciate the enormity of his repeated errors of judgment over the past year. And a leader who has to apologise to the country and take responsibility for such a colossal loss of life must surely be on borrowed time. The vaccine might save him for a few months but not for long I think.
I strongly suspect he will still be there in 2024 when there is a GE.
He'll go when he wants to. That might be a decade hence, or it might be tomorrow. If he senses he's about to lose, he'll walk before 2024.
But that photo- it's the look of a man who wanted to be a World God, got what he wanted, and has just realised that he's taken on a curse.
Who cares what Nelson says, he is only a journalist.
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll and getting Unionists to boycott it is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
PP haven't proved that. The ends don't justify the means and the Catalan separatists are still there and current opinion polls basically leave it 50/50.
And 4 years ago polls showed a Catalan majority for independence and had the PP granted a legal indyref then Catalonia would likely now be an independent state and Spain broken apart
It's pretty easy to say we really don't want one, but it is pretty hard to justifiably deny one when 'I don't want it' is pretty much the main reason against. I think a lot of people who are really opposed to it, and the potential outcome, recognise that.
Boris won't do that tho (I hope). He won't simply say a flat No. He will couch it as: "we are listening, we hear the Scottish people, they want ptofound change: let's have a Royal Commission on all the options, and that must include the possibility, at some point, of a 2nd referendum. However it is my duty as PM of the whole UK to consider what is best for the whole UK, as this affects every Briton profoundly."
A gentle punt into the long grass. Pray for something else to come along.
I've been wondering whether the lack of pre-emptive action on ensuring this spring's elections can go ahead is because Johnson would rather like the idea of delaying them again, hoping the Scottish government have to do likewise and so delaying a renewed electoral mandate for a new independence referendum.
Comments
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1354186932948004867?s=20
I did point out that vaccines are generally less effective in the elderly, and that there were so few over 65's in the published data that we could not say how effective it is in that group. I also said that we would know from real world UK data in about a months time.
Would also like to point out that, unless you want to sound like a highly partisan GOPer, should refer to "DemocratIC politician".
Realize that UK has "Liberal Democrat Party" but in USA we have "Democratic Party" as the historic, legal and conventional moniker.
Note in Canada they have the "New Democratic Party". NOT the New Democrat Party - which frankly (like Liberal Democrat Party) is ungrammatical IMHO.
With that in mind, the latest dialling up of rhetoric is an indication of just how worried they are about looking bad.
I don't believe they will actually try to impound supplies meant for other countries, but clearly they are very interested in knowing exactly who they can pin blame on, and to what extent.
That is a pathetic climbdown from the original claims. He's continually going backwards in what he's alleging.
It's gone from report of 8%, to an estimate of 8%, to a possible scenario where it could be as low as 8%.
I could be out on a date with Margo Robbie* this evening. That's possible. In a particular scenario**.
But it's certainly not a fact.
* I'm not, as I need to finish watching the Queen's Gambit
** In this scenario, all the other males on planet Earth have died
Given the potential damage his absurd story has done, he should be sacked tomorrow. If not arrested.
I know a lot of PB-ers don't have much respect for British media, but if any British journalist did this - especially in a serious paper, and also doubled down on it - they would have to resign immediately. Piers Morgan, an editor, resigned for less. The News of the World, an entire newspaper, was shut down for less.
A test for the morals of the German press.
I expect someone may have to resign over this
The senior official with intimate knowledge of German health policy maintains that he did not misread numbers as was suggested. According to regulatory and political sources in Germany, questions remained with regard to limited clinical data provided by AZ on elderly age groups
He should be sacked.
For once, just do the right thing.
That press?
The government have made quite clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
Refusing a legal indyref2 and refusing to recognise the result of any such illegal poll and getting Unionists to boycott it is by far the most important priority of this Tory government for the rest of its term in power alongside successful completion of the vaccination programme.
As the PP government in Spain proved in 2017 illegal referendums by nationalist governments can be ignored.
That quote seems to pin it down pretty much on one person, this official, while the journalist can still wriggle out and say the source made a mistake, since they were the one standing by the story, not him.
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1353814148166033414?s=19
And Wales has a worse death rate per head than England. And a poorer vaccine roll out.
You pay £200 to worthy charity if there are export restrictions on any EU produced vaccine between now and the end of March.
Its a bet I'm happy to lose.
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that suggested efficacy in elderly could be at around 8 percent, a possible scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
If it was corroborated then then what are those people saying now? Are they all insisting they got the 8% right? Otherwise is he admitting that he only ever had a single source?
Ignoring my flippant comment why is a sample of one (Spain) particularly valid? It didn't prove anything. It is just one example. A sample of say 5 would be an indication, but even that isn't proof.
Sure, it could get a bit pretentious at times, but ultimately it was a thoughtful, creative, unpredicable and funny comedy about flawed but likable characters who, unlike in most comedies, actually grew and developed as characters and became better people, not worse people.
Well worth a buy, and already putting a smile back on my face.
Last night:
https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841874008748034?s=20
No equivocation there
Or here
https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841879754878977?s=20
He then wrote another article tripling down, this evening, saying this:
"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 available to us so far, the effectiveness in people over 60 is less than ten percent. "
Now all that certainty has turned into:
"One senior official has described an internal analysis of clinical data that SUGGESTED efficacy in elderly COULD be at around 8 percent, a POSSIBLE scenario corroborated by other sources. AZ and Germany’s health ministry have denied this element of the story."
"We're letting science speak again".
Innovative.
Edit: And now someone drops something clattering to the floor off camera. Who says these things won't still be funny.
Ah yes, .... they are jointly running the part of the UK with the highest death rate per capita.
'Didn't misread' leaves vast wiggle room - the source may not have read the figures at all. He also reveals here that his '8%' bollocks only came from one of his sources, not multiple, as he said before. And rather than clarify that with 'their calculation is still that efficacy is 8%' etc. etc., he finishes with a weak 'questions remained'.
We went from:
-Efficacy is estimated by the German health dept at 8% in over 65s
-This is confirmed by multiple sources within the relevant German agency
-This is based on previously unseen data, not existing stuff in the public domain
To:
-No repetition of the 8%
-One source for the 8%, who 'insists he didn't misread' - the other sources merely say there are 'questions'
-There is no separate data/report, there are only questions already highlighted, based on the existing data
All that's left of his story is the fact that over 60's were a low percentage of the sample. There's nothing else.
I'm not sure what successes the devolved governments have managed beyond Sturgeon being good at press conferences.
I'm not expressing a view on that, but I'd like to know what the difference is between being an antivaxxer and being a climate change denier. To me they seem directly equivalent, and when I think of it in those terms it points me towards having the same view on what should or shouldn't happen to those people.
He could easily have said, "Look, no human, not even a Prime Minister, can stop a pandemic. This is not my responsibility." Instead, he has taken it on his shoulders.
Sure, plenty will blame him. And he and his government have made plenty of mistakes. But I don't see how this particular "Sorry" redounds badly on him.
Putting health to one side, and also money, what is there politically for Boris? Well, being Prime Minister is a nice job with lots of perks and ex officio respect. Hosting the G7 in June means mixing with world leaders, and the new American President is back on board with climate change, Covid and other global issues.
On the minus side, Covid is taking a severe toll on the nation and defies bombast (here and for President Trump) but once we are all vaccinated, it may recede as an issue. Scotland can be kicked into the long grass as suggested weeks ago by Captain Hindsight. Brexit's ructions can be blamed on Covid. And there is no Borisism, no defining project, no underlying political philosophy to keep him in place till it is achieved, unless you count Brexit and that is done.
I really do not know. I cannot see him being forced out but health might do for him, or money.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1354195378506244096?s=20
But that photo- it's the look of a man who wanted to be a World God, got what he wanted, and has just realised that he's taken on a curse.
Is that a resigning matter?