For once very little "clashing" from the British side. The UK government have been very calm so far over all.of this, it is the EU that have gone total Cartman blaming everybody under the sun but themselves
Unsurprisingly the Guardian condemns Boris for the mildest of remarks but records the German nutter MEP's threats of a trade war with no comment whatever.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
I hesitate to say this to a fellow poster as I try (and admittedly often fail) to be civil. But unless you can back up any of that post I am going to disregard it as bullshit of the crudest sort.
Given the links to the articles, do you still think it is bullshit of the crudest sort?
"people on here didn't really mind ..."
Well, they didn't. I was on here when those deaths occurred and there was minimal comment. Yet people can get worked up about some arse wearing horns in the Capitol.
BTW, you'd agree though that those deaths were terrible?
BBC World News reporting on the EU -AZ arguments was really, really bad. Extremely one sided. Twice repeated the EU claims that they had spent billions on vaccine development and so should be given priority whilst making no mention at all of the AZ rebuttals and the actual facts of the case. Apparently this is all AZs fault. Impression given also that AZ were making money out of this.
Well if you want the opposite skew just come on here. Put the two together and bob is your uncle.
Not at all. The reporting on here has been far more balanced and nuanced than the BBC.
When even Williamglenn is criticising the EU claims you know they have really dropped the ball here. Not that you would know it from the BBC.
What exactly are these 'European funds' that were pumped into the Pfizer/Biontech vaccine? If they're EU funds, then the UK paid its share anyway!
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
200m doses of Novavax, but no contract signed, only "exploratory talks". It means no first movers advantage, again.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
63% approval rating right now - Trump never got above 50.
"As it stands" table Liverpool are down to 6th, with 4th placed Toffees having a game in hand too. Would drop to 7th if Spurs get at least a draw in their own game in hand.
What odds would you have got on that a month ago? Sheesh.
I'm glad to see Scott'n'paste take a wellearned break from posting. Sensible given there's so little of importnace happening wrt his specialist subject.
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
That sounds about right. I had a look a little earlier to see what I could learn about Novavax and Valneva, as I thought that they might be the next two up after J&J, which looks very promising but might be problematic in the current environment as it's also produced on the continent.
Valneva is a long-term project (hopefully we'll have finished vaccinating all adults before they get as far as coming on stream,) but findings for the Novavax phase III trial ought apparently to be reported at some point during this quarter.
This is what the AstraZeneca CEO said in April 2020:
“We will build up capacity — we have an agreement with the [UK] government and to do this and we will prioritise the UK in terms of building this capacity."
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
200m doses of Novavax, but no contract signed, only "exploratory talks". It means no first movers advantage, again.
Groupwide EU procurement isn't neccessarily a bad thing and could have worked, but there just seems to have been no appetite for any sort of risk taking to get early doses of any jab by the negotiators. Given the relatively trivial costs of a duff vaccine compared against the value of the EU wide economy getting back to normal that seems incredibly short sighted.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
Your comments on this have come across as a bit disingenuous. You act as though no one is acknowledging any risk to the strategy and therefore you are speaking a bold truth trying to get people to accept it is a 'gamble', but who has not accepted that the choice was a calculation based on estimated risks? My reaction, which was not unique, to the plan when announced was that it was a very bad one.
If it is less than successful you will therefore probably claim no one thought about risk, which would not be true even if their assessment of the risk proved wrong, since there clearly was assessment.
So I don't know what point you are really trying to make. The only point seems to be that others talk about potential risks, and you wish everyone to use the word gamble.
There are risks involved in any strategy. Risks to individuals with either regime, I think we all accept.
What I fear though is the catastrophic risk of the extended gap. This is a risk of a major loss of confidence in vaccines in general, and also the NHS in particular. It is not just individuals at risk if the extended interval proves ineffective.
It is not even as straightforward as that, as we are comparining a high consequence, relatively well-known high probability event (people dying from not getting the first jab sooner) versus a higher unknown consequence of an entirely unknowable probability. This is not a quantifiable decision, but a judgment call. And is a judgment call with sufficient scientific and medical opinion behind it to make it reasonable politically.
It is very, very easy to call out bad decisions with 20/20 hindsight. It is much more difficult to be the person forced to make them in real-time with imperfect information.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
63% approval rating right now - Trump never got above 50.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
Agree, it won't be long now. If he could have chosen a set of orders guaranteed to rile people up, he has chosen the right ones.
What is going to be interesting is the fight at the state level. The likes of Texas are already coming out aggressively and the Republican states have learnt from the tactics of the Democrat-controlled ones as to how to use the authority of the individual states to frustrate federal mandates.
BBC World News reporting on the EU -AZ arguments was really, really bad. Extremely one sided. Twice repeated the EU claims that they had spent billions on vaccine development and so should be given priority whilst making no mention at all of the AZ rebuttals and the actual facts of the case. Apparently this is all AZs fault. Impression given also that AZ were making money out of this.
Well if you want the opposite skew just come on here. Put the two together and bob is your uncle.
Not at all. The reporting on here has been far more balanced and nuanced than the BBC.
When even Williamglenn is criticising the EU claims you know they have really dropped the ball here. Not that you would know it from the BBC.
I'm opposed to capital punishment on the grounds that I have seen the justice system work and I have no faith in it. When I raise the example of Timothy Evans inevitably I get the response "yeah, but what about Ted Bundy" - which makes my position a lot more difficult. I kind of feel the same way about my views on Europe and this EU vaccine debacle.
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
That sounds about right. I had a look a little earlier to see what I could learn about Novavax and Valneva, as I thought that they might be the next two up after J&J, which looks very promising but might be problematic in the current environment as it's also produced on the continent.
Valneva is a long-term project (hopefully we'll have finished vaccinating all adults before they get as far as coming on stream,) but findings for the Novavax phase III trial ought apparently to be reported at some point during this quarter.
I believe Robert said Novavax were aiming to provide their data by the end of this month, which is within the next 4 days.
"As it stands" table Liverpool are down to 6th, with 4th placed Toffees having a game in hand too. Would drop to 7th if Spurs get at least a draw in their own game in hand.
What odds would you have got on that a month ago? Sheesh.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
63% approval rating right now - Trump never got above 50.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
One other point @contrarian that hasn't been picked up. If you want to look at who is really in control amongst the Democrats, look at those executive orders. Does anyone really believe that they truly would have been on Joe Biden's priority list given his track record?
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
200m doses of Novavax, but no contract signed, only "exploratory talks". It means no first movers advantage, again.
Groupwide EU procurement isn't neccessarily a bad thing and could have worked, but there just seems to have been no appetite for any sort of risk taking to get early doses of any jab by the negotiators. Given the relatively trivial costs of a duff vaccine compared against the value of the EU wide economy getting back to normal that seems incredibly short sighted.
The EU should have told each country to buy enough vaccine for its own needs and then also bought enough vaccine for the EU as a whole.
With subsidies to create new production facilities.
"As it stands" table Liverpool are down to 6th, with 4th placed Toffees having a game in hand too. Would drop to 7th if Spurs get at least a draw in their own game in hand.
What odds would you have got on that a month ago? Sheesh.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
If he had gotten lucky Michael Pence was going to be executed.
If there's a case he had intent to murder Michael Pence and there's evidence to prove conspiracy to commit murder, then let's hear it. If it's just insinuation because others did or they suspect others might have done then it's not.
Whatever you feel about the politics of the cause and however unsympathetic you are to the accused there always has to be the fair administration of justice. In fact, that's the ultimate test of whether you *do* believe in the fair adminstration of justice.
As things stand it sounds like he's being singled out because he's seen as a "leader and symbol" of QAnon and they want to make an example of him. It happens regularly in America and you sometimes see people threatened with sentences hundreds of years long in the hope that they then engage in plea bargaining, which of course many do.
For any other politico people like, oh, I don't know, maybe the Secret Barrister, would have quite a bit to say about that.
Video taken by a New Yorker contributor during the U.S. Capitol riot shows a horn-hatted man from Phoenix proudly displaying and reading a note he left for Vice President Mike Pence — the same missive federal prosecutors described as threatening when they filed charges that could put him in prison for decades.
Ok, thanks. That's at least some evidence which changes things. I see the note only says, "It's only a matter of time. Justice is coming." though which could be read a number of different ways and doesn't demonstrate intent to kill, and I think a good defence counsel would be able to make that ambiguous evidence.
He should be prosecuted. He should be held to account. But only for what he's done. I don't agree with "show" justice and making an example of someone with ridiculous sentences just because they were high-profile - and because they can - in order to make a point, because that in itself is unjust.
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
That sounds about right. I had a look a little earlier to see what I could learn about Novavax and Valneva, as I thought that they might be the next two up after J&J, which looks very promising but might be problematic in the current environment as it's also produced on the continent.
Valneva is a long-term project (hopefully we'll have finished vaccinating all adults before they get as far as coming on stream,) but findings for the Novavax phase III trial ought apparently to be reported at some point during this quarter.
I believe Robert said Novavax were aiming to provide their data by the end of this month, which is within the next 4 days.
Yeah the presentation I saw about it last week said their trial was almost ready to report, within a week or two.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
Your comments on this have come across as a bit disingenuous. You act as though no one is acknowledging any risk to the strategy and therefore you are speaking a bold truth trying to get people to accept it is a 'gamble', but who has not accepted that the choice was a calculation based on estimated risks? My reaction, which was not unique, to the plan when announced was that it was a very bad one.
If it is less than successful you will therefore probably claim no one thought about risk, which would not be true even if their assessment of the risk proved wrong, since there clearly was assessment.
So I don't know what point you are really trying to make. The only point seems to be that others talk about potential risks, and you wish everyone to use the word gamble.
There are risks involved in any strategy. Risks to individuals with either regime, I think we all accept.
What I fear though is the catastrophic risk of the extended gap. This is a risk of a major loss of confidence in vaccines in general, and also the NHS in particular. It is not just individuals at risk if the extended interval proves ineffective.
It is not even as straightforward as that, as we are comparining a high consequence, relatively well-known high probability event (people dying from not getting the first jab sooner) versus a higher unknown consequence of an entirely unknowable probability. This is not a quantifiable decision, but a judgment call. And is a judgment call with sufficient scientific and medical opinion behind it to make it reasonable politically.
It is very, very easy to call out bad decisions with 20/20 hindsight. It is much more difficult to be the person forced to make them in real-time with imperfect information.
Yes, that is very much what I was trying to say.
A lot depends on how how likely that event is, but also how catastrophic. It is not a simple sum.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
Agree, it won't be long now. If he could have chosen a set of orders guaranteed to rile people up, he has chosen the right ones.
What is going to be interesting is the fight at the state level. The likes of Texas are already coming out aggressively and the Republican states have learnt from the tactics of the Democrat-controlled ones as to how to use the authority of the individual states to frustrate federal mandates.
Also, will Republican legislatures act on election rules so that local voters are reassured voting is fair?
Huge numbers still think it isn't, and that is v. bad for turnout.
I'm glad to see Scott'n'paste take a wellearned break from posting. Sensible given there's so little of importnace happening wrt his specialist subject.
One can only imagine that he's taking his lead from the distinguished members of the Commission, several of whom seem to be rocking back and forth on their haunches in a darkened room, muttering 'We're not owned, we're not owned...'
"The Oxford coronavirus vaccine - which is set to be manufactured at Keele following an agreement between Cobra Biologics and AstraZeneca UK - shows a strong immune response in adults in their 60s and 70s, raising hopes that it can protect age groups most at risk from the virus."
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
63% approval rating right now - Trump never got above 50.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
If he had gotten lucky Michael Pence was going to be executed.
If there's a case he had intent to murder Michael Pence and there's evidence to prove conspiracy to commit murder, then let's hear it. If it's just insinuation because others did or they suspect others might have done then it's not.
Whatever you feel about the politics of the cause and however unsympathetic you are to the accused there always has to be the fair administration of justice. In fact, that's the ultimate test of whether you *do* believe in the fair adminstration of justice.
As things stand it sounds like he's being singled out because he's seen as a "leader and symbol" of QAnon and they want to make an example of him. It happens regularly in America and you sometimes see people threatened with sentences hundreds of years long in the hope that they then engage in plea bargaining, which of course many do.
For any other politico people like, oh, I don't know, maybe the Secret Barrister, would have quite a bit to say about that.
Video taken by a New Yorker contributor during the U.S. Capitol riot shows a horn-hatted man from Phoenix proudly displaying and reading a note he left for Vice President Mike Pence — the same missive federal prosecutors described as threatening when they filed charges that could put him in prison for decades.
He should be prosecuted. He should be held to account. But only for what he's done. I don't agree with "show" justice and making an example of someone with ridiculous sentences just because they were high-profile - and because they can - in order to make a point, because that in itself is unjust.
After the London Riots in 2011 the participants were given heavier sentences than usual to make an example of them. Did you disagree with that also?
"The Oxford coronavirus vaccine - which is set to be manufactured at Keele following an agreement between Cobra Biologics and AstraZeneca UK - shows a strong immune response in adults in their 60s and 70s, raising hopes that it can protect age groups most at risk from the virus."
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
200m doses of Novavax, but no contract signed, only "exploratory talks". It means no first movers advantage, again.
Given the EU’s threats regarding AstraZeneca, do we have any concerns about any European companies? I would have thought that, given the inaccuracy of BMW and Audi speedometers, particularly around 30mph and 70mph, together with the failure of their direction indicators to work reliably, there must be a case for individual manually completed risk assessment forms for all German cars imported to the UK.
Not really. And just because security was lacking at the capitol doesn't make an attempted coup any less problematic either. The US penal system can be very harsh. It's something you need to consider there before committing a crime. He was in his 30s, not some teenager who didn't know any better too. On another controversial matter, I think Rittenhouse has a legit self defense case.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
No, I didn't miss them.
Did he kill any of those five people?
He was part of an armed attempt to overthrow the elected government, during which five people died. Harsh sentence? Tough shit I say.
Was he armed? Was he trying to kill anyone? Did he intend to do so? Was he leading and inciting those who did to do so?
If not, he is simply a target of political justice because of his media profile whilst the real perpetrators go free.
If there's evidence he did, let's hear it.
Group punishment without discrimination doesn't wash with me. It shouldn't with you either.
Actions have consequences. Maybe I am seeing it from a uk perspective, where a 20 year sentence usually means out in 10. I don’t know if that’s true in the us. I know that attempting armed revolution puts you in a difficult position if you don’t win.
As federal law enforcement officers sift through evidence tied to the attack on the U.S. Capitol, they have tried to determine what compelled rioters to force their way into the building. Namely, did any of them plan to kill or capture lawmakers or their staffers?
Officials said they may have found clues to that question from one of the mob’s most distinctive figures: Jacob Anthony Chansley, the shirtless, tattooed man often referred to as “QAnon Shaman,” who stood out in a headdress made of coyote skin and buffalo horns.
In a court filing late Thursday, federal prosecutors in Phoenix wrote that “strong evidence, including Chansley’s own words and actions at the Capitol, supports that the intent of the Capitol rioters was to capture and assassinate elected officials in the United States government.”
I'm glad to see Scott'n'paste take a wellearned break from posting. Sensible given there's so little of importnace happening wrt his specialist subject.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
It’s a judgement call, based on a review of the scientific data available, not “a gamble”
Plus, what is best for the people of Britain by slowing the spread of CV19 is different to what is best for an individual. It will result in a whole lot fewer cases id we have 90% of people 70% immune, than 45% of people 95% immune.
The EU is also close to signing a contract with U.S. company Novavax for up to 200 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, one of the EU officials said, adding that a deal was “imminent”.
The EU is also talking to French pharmaceuticals company Valneva about a potential deal for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, said two EU officials involved in the negotiations.
Millions of doses of the Valneva vaccine, which started Phase I and II clinical trials in December, have already been booked by Britain.
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
No, I didn't miss them.
Did he kill any of those five people?
He was part of an armed attempt to overthrow the elected government, during which five people died. Harsh sentence? Tough shit I say.
Was he armed? Was he trying to kill anyone? Did he intend to do so? Was he leading and inciting those who did to do so?
If not, he is simply a target of political justice because of his media profile whilst the real perpetrators go free.
If there's evidence he did, let's hear it.
Group punishment without discrimination doesn't wash with me. It shouldn't with you either.
Actions have consequences. Maybe I am seeing it from a uk perspective, where a 20 year sentence usually means out in 10. I don’t know if that’s true in the us. I know that attempting armed revolution puts you in a difficult position if you don’t win.
Isn't the way that US "Justice" works that the prosecution puts in for a very severe sentence, with pressure to plea bargain. The defendant then admits a lesser offence and gets just a few years?
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
It’s a judgement call, based on a review of the scientific data available, not “a gamble”
Plus, what is best for the people of Britain by slowing the spread of CV19 is different to what is best for an individual. It will result in a whole lot fewer cases id we have 90% of people 70% immune, than 45% of people 95% immune.
Which I've not seen disputed, yet it seems a vital thing to consider (or reject) when determining if the 'gamble' is worthwhile.
If he did so, would that not make Swayne a martyr, draw attention to his theories, and 'confirm' the view of these people of a shadowy conspiracy by those in power to silence the truth?
You can argue about opening up, a la Baker but Boris should make it clear there's no place for this nonsense in the Tories. He can fuck off and join Piers Corbyn/David Icke.
"The Oxford coronavirus vaccine - which is set to be manufactured at Keele following an agreement between Cobra Biologics and AstraZeneca UK - shows a strong immune response in adults in their 60s and 70s, raising hopes that it can protect age groups most at risk from the virus."
One thing I detest about the USA justice system is these utterly biblical punishments for crimes.
Yes, he's a nob. But it's not justice.
Did you miss the five deaths? I imagine if five people had been killed attacking the uk parliament we’d be pretty annoyed too.
Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.
'Funnily enough, people on here didn't really mind when people were being killed defending shops against looters in the BLM riots, nor when people were being murdered for answering back to BLM supporters. I guess it's a question of priorities.'
So I was asking about the people on here that you talked about.
First of all when you said name names I thought you meant who was killed. So my misunderstanding.
Second of all, given I am saying that people on here were NOT up in arms when these people were killed, how do I suggest I name names? They were noticeable by their absence of condemnation, not for what they said.
There were plenty of people who will have condemned it, and if there was an absence of people disagreeing with them then by that logic they must have agreed with the condemnation through their absence of comment about it.
I think the people on here who would have condemned it would have been the usual suspects including myself and probably Contrarian, maybe one or two others. But I remember thinking at the time about all the outrage about police brutality and yet very few people mentioned the ones who had been killed in riots. I think one or two people may have mentioned David Dorn but I certainly not remember any comments about the mother being shot.
I'm keeping my powder dry for when Biden is in trouble. Which he will be. Looking at some of his executive orders, it won't be long, either.
One other point @contrarian that hasn't been picked up. If you want to look at who is really in control amongst the Democrats, look at those executive orders. Does anyone really believe that they truly would have been on Joe Biden's priority list given his track record?
I'd be very curious, amongst all the fire and fury about the UK's 12-week second jab policy, whether any European country has even done more second jabs than the UK have yet. I highly doubt it.
Report earlier today that 200,000 elderly Italians in total have received the first jab. I bet more than that many elderly Brits have already received the second.
The 12 week policy is an excellent idea, but the volume of our rollout is such that even a small proportion of seconds here is still significant compared to elsewhere.
I'm still not convinced - we've no evidence of the efficacy of the single Pfizer vaccination at Day 50, 60 or 70. If we were to ease restrictions and it turned out those with a single vaccination were not adequately protected, I think there would be questions asked and rightly so.
I believe Israel has carried out a much greater proportion of second vaccinations:
More than half of those vaccinated have received two vaccinations - very different to the UK.
I think you're making the mistake of thinking that this is a step function, rather than a slow fade. Yes, it may very well be a less effective on day 60 or day 90... but it will still probably be very effective at reducing severe infections.
In addition, given that we're going to see a doubling or quadrupling of supply as new vaccines are approved, better to take a bit of a calculated risk and get more people with first jabs (cutting overall spread) more quickly.
"The Oxford coronavirus vaccine - which is set to be manufactured at Keele following an agreement between Cobra Biologics and AstraZeneca UK - shows a strong immune response in adults in their 60s and 70s, raising hopes that it can protect age groups most at risk from the virus."
Fake news. Some chap in Germany heard from a mate down the pub it was shit, so that’s why the Germans want loads of it, or something.
Actually very good news, but not unexpected. Matches the phase II data on antibody production.
This subject was raised repeatedly on here during the demolition of the 8% story the other evening. It's discussed in the Lancet article on the phase III trials.
The issue with the trials for the Oxford vaccine does not appear to be that it is wholly ineffective in the old, but rather that there were insufficient older people included in the trials to arrive at a proper statistical conclusion as to *exactly* how effective the vaccine was in the over 55s.
One has to assume that the MHRA, when they reviewed the available evidence, concluded that the vaccine was highly likely to be good enough, despite this paucity of data, and decided to roll with it. To the layman, that seems logical: if the immune response seen in the older recipients was about as strong as that seen in the younger ones then, even if the vaccine is slightly less effective in older people, it doesn't seem plausible that any drop-off in performance would occur suddenly and catastrophically just because someone has recently received some 55th (or 65th, or 75th) birthday cards.
Am I correct in thinking that the next likely vaccine candidates are J&J - which we ordered ahead of the EU, and Novavax, which the EU have not ordered at all (UK 60 million doses)?
That sounds about right. I had a look a little earlier to see what I could learn about Novavax and Valneva, as I thought that they might be the next two up after J&J, which looks very promising but might be problematic in the current environment as it's also produced on the continent.
Valneva is a long-term project (hopefully we'll have finished vaccinating all adults before they get as far as coming on stream,) but findings for the Novavax phase III trial ought apparently to be reported at some point during this quarter.
I believe Robert said Novavax were aiming to provide their data by the end of this month, which is within the next 4 days.
Novavax and J&J have both said "this month", although I wouldn't be surprised if Novavax slipped into next week.
If he did so, would that not make Swayne a martyr, draw attention to his theories, and 'confirm' the view of these people of a shadowy conspiracy by those in power to silence the truth?
Better to ignore him.
Ah yes, the "suffer no consequences for my actions" approach
You can argue about opening up, a la Baker but Boris should make it clear there's no place for this nonsense in the Tories. He can fuck off and join Piers Corbyn/David Icke.
Again read the article. Swayne says nothing about vaccines at all, He is talking about lockdown measures. Its a hit piece.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
It’s a judgement call, based on a review of the scientific data available, not “a gamble”
Plus, what is best for the people of Britain by slowing the spread of CV19 is different to what is best for an individual. It will result in a whole lot fewer cases id we have 90% of people 70% immune, than 45% of people 95% immune.
Yes, but we do need to consider that the higher level of antibodies after the second dose are probably high enough to prevent onward transmission, but the much lower level of antibodies after a single dose may not.
Once again we do not yet know this for sure, so how do we incorporate that in the risk assessment?
If he did so, would that not make Swayne a martyr, draw attention to his theories, and 'confirm' the view of these people of a shadowy conspiracy by those in power to silence the truth?
Better to ignore him.
I really think we generally overestimate the risks of making people 'martyrs'. It seems to come up with pretty much any issue as an excuse not to take action against a person, as if every person who could face consequences for their actions and words will become more powerful than we can imagine if they are struck down.
Swayne is a mouthy backbencher with a rock solid seat for life who already has a gong so wouldn't even keep his mouth shut on the hope he''ll get honoured one day in reward. It may well be that in general he can be kept in the tent pissing out, but a situation like this creates a new context for his pissing and it may perhaps be reconsidered that some people thinking him martyred may be less harmful than taking action.
And going on about hidden agendas and such, seeing conspiracies in public health measures, is indeed dangerous and extremely silly. Conspiracy theorists as MPs is troublesome.
"The Oxford coronavirus vaccine - which is set to be manufactured at Keele following an agreement between Cobra Biologics and AstraZeneca UK - shows a strong immune response in adults in their 60s and 70s, raising hopes that it can protect age groups most at risk from the virus."
Fake news. Some chap in Germany heard from a mate down the pub it was shit, so that’s why the Germans want loads of it, or something.
Actually very good news, but not unexpected. Matches the phase II data on antibody production.
This subject was raised repeatedly on here during the demolition of the 8% story the other evening. It's discussed in the Lancet article on the phase III trials.
The issue with the trials for the Oxford vaccine does not appear to be that it is wholly ineffective in the old, but rather that there were insufficient older people included in the trials to arrive at a proper statistical conclusion as to *exactly* how effective the vaccine was in the over 55s.
One has to assume that the MHRA, when they reviewed the available evidence, concluded that the vaccine was highly likely to be good enough, despite this paucity of data, and decided to roll with it. To the layman, that seems logical: if the immune response seen in the older recipients was about as strong as that seen in the younger ones then, even if the vaccine is slightly less effective in older people, it doesn't seem plausible that any drop-off in performance would occur suddenly and catastrophically just because someone has recently received some 55th (or 65th, or 75th) birthday cards.
Quite. I didn't want to post about this as I am no scientist but even with my GCSE in Chemistry (an 'A' I'll have you know) it seemed quite incredible that a vaccine with a 70% success rate (or 90% - that's one of the problems) would have its efficacy plummit off a cliff at an arbitrary age. A gradual decline, sure, I get that. But not a compound that suddenly goes on strike the day its host becomes eligible for a bus pass.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
Or maybe manufacturing such a vaccine to the standard required in record quantities and in record time is a complicated matter, prone to inevitable delays and complications ......
It is indeed, but throughout AZN have overpromised, even compared to other vaccine companies.
What, like Sanofi? The Pasteur Institute? GSK? Imperial?
You have slurred AZN outrageously. They and Oxford have got together and created a vaccine with, apparently, 70% efficacy - or better- and they have done it in 9 months from scratch, a feat hitherto thought impossible by all. Yes, a couple of other companies have been equally brilliant, but AZN have produced the cheapest vaccine, and the easiest to store, so far, and one which could be the saviour of the Developing World.
Your accusations are absurd and, frankly, obnoxious. And stem, I fear, from some residual, pathetic Remoanerism.
Oh, and I forgot to add: AZN are doing it all, uniquely, not-for-profit.
Although I’m not yet quite 70, I was vaccinated (AZ) today. [My GP’s surgery sent a text at 1p.m. saying I could make an appointment at a centre in London today if I called the surgery today -- which I did.] I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day, Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
If he did so, would that not make Swayne a martyr, draw attention to his theories, and 'confirm' the view of these people of a shadowy conspiracy by those in power to silence the truth?
Better to ignore him.
Ah yes, the "suffer no consequences for my actions" approach
A sure fire winner that has always worked
I merely suggest that the wider consequences for everyone should be taken into account.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
It’s a judgement call, based on a review of the scientific data available, not “a gamble”
Plus, what is best for the people of Britain by slowing the spread of CV19 is different to what is best for an individual. It will result in a whole lot fewer cases id we have 90% of people 70% immune, than 45% of people 95% immune.
I had my second meeting with a world leading viral immunologist today, it was a follow up specifically to find out about lengthening the time between jabs, what effects that might have on vaccine resistance and how efficacy might diminish after week 3 until week 12. Essentially to go through the downsides of the policy.
The rundown:
1. On vaccine resistance, they aren't worried, they think convalescent plasma is a much bigger issue for mutation, doesn't think the virus will easily adapt to partial immunity as viral mutations happen over a prolonged period of infection in a single host to evade immune responses, most major mutations have come from infections in people that lasted over 30 days. Even with partial vaccine immunity there will be far fewer events like this so it's much less likely to occur. The analogy of an incomplete antibiotics course doesn't apply.
2. Diminished efficacy. This could be a problem, especially in older cohorts but for the AZ vaccine it is unavoidable as the best immune response comes from a 9-12 week gap. For Pfizer, they said the government should seriously consider reducing the gap to 6 or 8 weeks, especially as the supply issues ease over the next few weeks. They hope the government scientists are doing follow up antibody tests for week 4 onwards so we get hard data on it.
3. The longer gap for Pfizer may actually give better overall protection and this could be key to defeating mutations as the binding efficiency of all vaccines on the Brazilian variant is significantly lower, having more antibodies present (they think a 6-8 week gap could produce more than 3x the immune response based on other similar vaccines) will help in the short term while vaccines are redesigned for new variants, tested for efficacy and then rolled out.
4. No specific vaccine type is better or worse to fight off variants. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. They were very impresse by the government's vaccine programme and wished their home country had organised it half as well. They hope that the UK will expand the vaccine manufacturing centre and use it to make vaccines at speed and scale for the whole world, they think the UK can go from being a relative backwater for vaccines to being the world leader in technology and manufacturing within a year.
I have the option of a third meeting but I can't think of any other questions.
Although I’m not yet quite 70, I was vaccinated (AZ) today. [My GP’s surgery sent a text at 1p.m. saying I could make an appointment at a centre in London today if I called the surgery today -- which I did.] I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day, Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
I'm guessing it's unavoidable in big cities. The only alternative would be a door-to-door vaccination service and that could take months, years, if it were possible at all.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
You really are a piece of work, Foxy. I appreciate everything you do for the NHS, don't get me wrong, but you're repeating these falsehoods and muddying the waters based on your personal political agenda. All of your bleating about the single jab policy, all of your rubbish over the last few days clearly supporting the EU despite their complete unreasonableness, it's beyond the pale.
I suggest you have a think your position and apparently blind love of the EU.
I have been too busy at work to follow the rather opaque shouting match between AZN and EU over what an unpublished contract shows.
My views on the gamble of the extended interval for the Pfizer is widely shared, and indeed the policy of the WHO, USA, Israel, and elsewhere. As I have repeatedly said, it may well be a successful gamble, but it is a gamble. There has been no trial of that as a treatment protocol.
It’s a judgement call, based on a review of the scientific data available, not “a gamble”
Plus, what is best for the people of Britain by slowing the spread of CV19 is different to what is best for an individual. It will result in a whole lot fewer cases id we have 90% of people 70% immune, than 45% of people 95% immune.
I had my second meeting with a world leading viral immunologist today, it was a follow up specifically to find out about lengthening the time between jabs, what effects that might have on vaccine resistance and how efficacy might diminish after week 3 until week 12. Essentially to go through the downsides of the policy.
The rundown:
1. On vaccine resistance, they aren't worried, they think convalescent plasma is a much bigger issue for mutation, doesn't think the virus will easily adapt to partial immunity as viral mutations happen over a prolonged period of infection in a single host to evade immune responses, most major mutations have come from infections in people that lasted over 30 days. Even with partial vaccine immunity there will be far fewer events like this so it's much less likely to occur. The analogy of an incomplete antibiotics course doesn't apply.
2. Diminished efficacy. This could be a problem, especially in older cohorts but for the AZ vaccine it is unavoidable as the best immune response comes from a 9-12 week gap. For Pfizer, they said the government should seriously consider reducing the gap to 6 or 8 weeks, especially as the supply issues ease over the next few weeks. They hope the government scientists are doing follow up antibody tests for week 4 onwards so we get hard data on it.
3. The longer gap for Pfizer may actually give better overall protection and this could be key to defeating mutations as the binding efficiency of all vaccines on the Brazilian variant is significantly lower, having more antibodies present (they think a 6-8 week gap could produce more than 3x the immune response based on other similar vaccines) will help in the short term while vaccines are redesigned for new variants, tested for efficacy and then rolled out.
4. No specific vaccine type is better or worse to fight off variants. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. They were very impresse by the government's vaccine programme and wished their home country had organised it half as well. They hope that the UK will expand the vaccine manufacturing centre and use it to make vaccines at speed and scale for the whole world, they think the UK can go from being a relative backwater for vaccines to being the world leader in technology and manufacturing within a year.
I have the option of a third meeting but I can't think of any other questions.
Although I’m not yet quite 70, I was vaccinated (AZ) today. [My GP’s surgery sent a text at 1p.m. saying I could make an appointment at a centre in London today if I called the surgery today -- which I did.] I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day, Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
They might also have a word with the Germans about the spread of alarmist false nonsense about the vaccine.
Don't you mean 'another word?'
Possibly.
Were I AZ I'd be livid about those reports. Not just damaging to the vaccine and the company and the integrity of its scientists but to the cause of vaccination.
What do you reckon, 10% of their $130bn market cap as the AZ legal team’s first settlement offer to the EU?
I don't think the EU wants that much from AZN.
You think AZN are in the wrong here?
I have no idea, I don't think the contracts are in the public domain. Politico seems to thing they include obligations to deliver.
And as we know, AZN has form in not delivering on schedule. A month ago it was us!
Hm, the EU vaccine apologist? I think consensus is that the contract will include the boiler plate stuff about "best effort" basis, and that the EU's pleads regarding morality etc. show how weak their legal position is. You are correct about the delays affecting everyone though.
As no one has seen the contract apart from the parties themselves, it is just speculation. Certainly AZN is developing a reputation as an unreliable supplier.
Or maybe manufacturing such a vaccine to the standard required in record quantities and in record time is a complicated matter, prone to inevitable delays and complications ......
It is indeed, but throughout AZN have overpromised, even compared to other vaccine companies.
What, like Sanofi? The Pasteur Institute? GSK? Imperial?
You have slurred AZN outrageously. They and Oxford have got together and created a vaccine with, apparently, 70% efficacy - or better- and they have done it in 9 months from scratch, a feat hitherto thought impossible by all. Yes, a couple of other companies have been equally brilliant, but AZN have produced the cheapest vaccine, and the easiest to store, so far, and one which could be the saviour of the Developing World.
Your accusations are absurd and, frankly, obnoxious. And stem, I fear, from some residual, pathetic Remoanerism.
Oh, and I forgot to add: AZN are doing it all, uniquely, not-for-profit.
You’ll be asking for Foxy to be fired shortly, I can feel it in my water.
Read this earlier this evening, on British recovery of crashed Yak 28 in Berlin, a very slow and deliberate recovery of pilots, radar, jet engines and airframe.
Oh, thank you! I think I read something about it in Aeriplane Monthly some years back but I'm reading about Brixmis at the moment so it's very topical.
Edit: and I emjoyed the story. Soi characteristic of the legalistic games of the time in Berlin.
Although I’m not yet quite 70, I was vaccinated (AZ) today. [My GP’s surgery sent a text at 1p.m. saying I could make an appointment at a centre in London today if I called the surgery today -- which I did.] I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day, Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
I'm guessing it's unavoidable in big cities. The only alternative would be a door-to-door vaccination service and that could take months, years, if it were possible at all.
They could fund ubers and black cabs, who have little work on at the moment, to transport people to vaccination centres instead of public transport. Easy and cheap to do in the big scheme of things.
Although I’m not yet quite 70, I was vaccinated (AZ) today. [My GP’s surgery sent a text at 1p.m. saying I could make an appointment at a centre in London today if I called the surgery today -- which I did.] I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day, Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
Glad to hear you've had the first jab - though another example of London moving on to relative youngsters. Any virus spread caused by people getting vaccinated can't be all that high as cases overall appear to be falling.
What's interesting is that there is a lot of the same ethos, language, and memes that lead to Trump — back when Trump even running was ROFL, and not the disaster of his victory — except this time is screwing with the markets rather than politics.
If he did so, would that not make Swayne a martyr, draw attention to his theories, and 'confirm' the view of these people of a shadowy conspiracy by those in power to silence the truth?
Better to ignore him.
I really think we generally overestimate the risks of making people 'martyrs'. It seems to come up with pretty much any issue as an excuse not to take action against a person, as if every person who could face consequences for their actions and words will become more powerful than we can imagine if they are struck down.
Swayne is a mouthy backbencher with a rock solid seat for life who already has a gong so wouldn't even keep his mouth shut on the hope he''ll get honoured one day in reward. It may well be that in general he can be kept in the tent pissing out, but a situation like this creates a new context for his pissing and it may perhaps be reconsidered that some people thinking him martyred may be less harmful than taking action.
And going on about hidden agendas and such, seeing conspiracies in public health measures, is indeed dangerous and extremely silly. Conspiracy theorists as MPs is troublesome.
We need mouthy backbenchers. We also need people who speak out about what they regard to be conspiracies in public health measures - if such situations were ever to occur. I am glad rather than sad that the fruitier side of politics is represented within the Commons, rather than just by powerless and resentful people outside of the system, it's a healthy pressure valve, and it would be horrendous, absolutely horrendous, if ones views had to be modified in order to become an MP.
Comments
BTW, you'd agree though that those deaths were terrible?
What odds would you have got on that a month ago? Sheesh.
Valneva is a long-term project (hopefully we'll have finished vaccinating all adults before they get as far as coming on stream,) but findings for the Novavax phase III trial ought apparently to be reported at some point during this quarter.
It is very, very easy to call out bad decisions with 20/20 hindsight. It is much more difficult to be the person forced to make them in real-time with imperfect information.
Or something.
What is going to be interesting is the fight at the state level. The likes of Texas are already coming out aggressively and the Republican states have learnt from the tactics of the Democrat-controlled ones as to how to use the authority of the individual states to frustrate federal mandates.
Did he kill any of those five people?
Though I actually don't know what a 'good' rating would be, as Trump I imagine was pretty sui generis.
With subsidies to create new production facilities.
I see the note only says, "It's only a matter of time. Justice is coming." though which could be read a number of different ways and doesn't demonstrate intent to kill, and I think a good defence counsel would be able to make that ambiguous evidence.
He should be prosecuted. He should be held to account. But only for what he's done. I don't agree with "show" justice and making an example of someone with ridiculous sentences just because they were high-profile - and because they can - in order to make a point, because that in itself is unjust.
Your views are coloured by your political views.
This is the problem.
A lot depends on how how likely that event is, but also how catastrophic. It is not a simple sum.
Huge numbers still think it isn't, and that is v. bad for turnout.
https://www.keele.ac.uk/discover/news/2020/november/oxford-vaccine-shows/strong-immune-response.php
I get the impression that his followers grew proportionally to the number of incorrect predictions.
Actually very good news, but not unexpected. Matches the phase II data on antibody production.
If not, he is simply a target of political justice because of his media profile whilst the real perpetrators go free.
If there's evidence he did, let's hear it.
Group punishment without discrimination doesn't wash with me. It shouldn't with you either.
https://www.politico.eu/article/commission-closing-in-on-deal-for-up-to-200m-doses-of-novavax-coronavirus-vaccine/
6 weeks ago........
And just because security was lacking at the capitol doesn't make an attempted coup any less problematic either.
The US penal system can be very harsh. It's something you need to consider there before committing a crime. He was in his 30s, not some teenager who didn't know any better too.
On another controversial matter, I think Rittenhouse has a legit self defense case.
This is the kind of fucking bullshit that the antivaxxers will use.
Swayne is worse than a Handelsblatt journalist.
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1354536495412109314
The EU is also close to signing a contract with U.S. company Novavax for up to 200 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, one of the EU officials said, adding that a deal was “imminent”.
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-vaccines/update-1-exclusive-eu-seeks-more-moderna-covid-19-vaccines-eyes-deals-with-valneva-novavax-idUSL1N2JM1U2?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
And:
The EU is also talking to French pharmaceuticals company Valneva about a potential deal for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, said two EU officials involved in the negotiations.
Millions of doses of the Valneva vaccine, which started Phase I and II clinical trials in December, have already been booked by Britain.
Better to ignore him.
In addition, given that we're going to see a doubling or quadrupling of supply as new vaccines are approved, better to take a bit of a calculated risk and get more people with first jabs (cutting overall spread) more quickly.
The issue with the trials for the Oxford vaccine does not appear to be that it is wholly ineffective in the old, but rather that there were insufficient older people included in the trials to arrive at a proper statistical conclusion as to *exactly* how effective the vaccine was in the over 55s.
One has to assume that the MHRA, when they reviewed the available evidence, concluded that the vaccine was highly likely to be good enough, despite this paucity of data, and decided to roll with it. To the layman, that seems logical: if the immune response seen in the older recipients was about as strong as that seen in the younger ones then, even if the vaccine is slightly less effective in older people, it doesn't seem plausible that any drop-off in performance would occur suddenly and catastrophically just because someone has recently received some 55th (or 65th, or 75th) birthday cards.
The efficacy of lockdown will be debated at the Oxford Union soon, or may have already, I believe.
A sure fire winner that has always worked
Do AZ execs still have their knee caps?
Once again we do not yet know this for sure, so how do we incorporate that in the risk assessment?
Swayne is a mouthy backbencher with a rock solid seat for life who already has a gong so wouldn't even keep his mouth shut on the hope he''ll get honoured one day in reward. It may well be that in general he can be kept in the tent pissing out, but a situation like this creates a new context for his pissing and it may perhaps be reconsidered that some people thinking him martyred may be less harmful than taking action.
And going on about hidden agendas and such, seeing conspiracies in public health measures, is indeed dangerous and extremely silly. Conspiracy theorists as MPs is troublesome.
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1354536220110577664
You have slurred AZN outrageously. They and Oxford have got together and created a vaccine with, apparently, 70% efficacy - or better- and they have done it in 9 months from scratch, a feat hitherto thought impossible by all. Yes, a couple of other companies have been equally brilliant, but AZN have produced the cheapest vaccine, and the easiest to store, so far, and one which could be the saviour of the Developing World.
Your accusations are absurd and, frankly, obnoxious. And stem, I fear, from some residual, pathetic Remoanerism.
Oh, and I forgot to add: AZN are doing it all, uniquely, not-for-profit.
https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1354525081213562882
I’m pleased to have had my first dose, of course. But given that I had to take underground trains and buses, and to join one after another queue at the centre, I couldn’t help thinking that my chance of getting infected with the virus today must be 100-fold greater than on any normal-for-me locked-down day,
Has anyone doing the sums/predictions considered the extent to which the vaccine programme may be contributing to the spread?, I wonder.
The rundown:
1. On vaccine resistance, they aren't worried, they think convalescent plasma is a much bigger issue for mutation, doesn't think the virus will easily adapt to partial immunity as viral mutations happen over a prolonged period of infection in a single host to evade immune responses, most major mutations have come from infections in people that lasted over 30 days. Even with partial vaccine immunity there will be far fewer events like this so it's much less likely to occur. The analogy of an incomplete antibiotics course doesn't apply.
2. Diminished efficacy. This could be a problem, especially in older cohorts but for the AZ vaccine it is unavoidable as the best immune response comes from a 9-12 week gap. For Pfizer, they said the government should seriously consider reducing the gap to 6 or 8 weeks, especially as the supply issues ease over the next few weeks. They hope the government scientists are doing follow up antibody tests for week 4 onwards so we get hard data on it.
3. The longer gap for Pfizer may actually give better overall protection and this could be key to defeating mutations as the binding efficiency of all vaccines on the Brazilian variant is significantly lower, having more antibodies present (they think a 6-8 week gap could produce more than 3x the immune response based on other similar vaccines) will help in the short term while vaccines are redesigned for new variants, tested for efficacy and then rolled out.
4. No specific vaccine type is better or worse to fight off variants. Each has their advantages and disadvantages. They were very impresse by the government's vaccine programme and wished their home country had organised it half as well. They hope that the UK will expand the vaccine manufacturing centre and use it to make vaccines at speed and scale for the whole world, they think the UK can go from being a relative backwater for vaccines to being the world leader in technology and manufacturing within a year.
I have the option of a third meeting but I can't think of any other questions.
Just 49m vaccines to find. I'm sure AZ can probably bump back up their number a bit, but that many?
Genuinely shocking at the mo'
Edit: and I emjoyed the story. Soi characteristic of the legalistic games of the time in Berlin.
Translation: We realise we derped and want to brush this over now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_il4CW9CNM