What is the plan for under 18s? Not heard anything on this, are the pharma companies starting trials for them yet, or is the plan just to leave them unvaccinated indefinitely?
U18s haven't been part of any of the vaccine trials, so not yet. Israel are now trialling the Pfizer vaccine with 16-18 year olds, in an attempt to hold school exams in the summer.
Not testing on children has been one of the consequences of trying to cram years of trials into months. Who would have volunteered their own children for trials of an untested vaccine, for a disease which doesn't seem to affect children much at all?
I think that the amount of ‘unused” vaccines is rather exaggerated, as it does not take into consideration the wasted jabs (for example the Pfizer vaccine only has a 5 hour shelf life once opened, and if there are no-shows, then it cannot be saved). My wife had a jab last week (earlier than expected) as there was availability due to no-shows, and the vaccine would otherwise have had to be discarded. It would not surprise me if there is a lot of this kind of waste that goes unreported. Going forward, this discrepancy will only grow, making it look as though health authorities are stockpiling, or sitting on vaccines, when this will not necessarily be the case. I would think that an inventory at some stage should be required.
There's a story on CNN about queues forming outside some US pharmacies of people hoping to claim an unusued leftover virus at the end of each day.
That may well be true, though probably they would be queuing for the vaccine...
I think that the amount of ‘unused” vaccines is rather exaggerated, as it does not take into consideration the wasted jabs (for example the Pfizer vaccine only has a 5 hour shelf life once opened, and if there are no-shows, then it cannot be saved). My wife had a jab last week (earlier than expected) as there was availability due to no-shows, and the vaccine would otherwise have had to be discarded. It would not surprise me if there is a lot of this kind of waste that goes unreported. Going forward, this discrepancy will only grow, making it look as though health authorities are stockpiling, or sitting on vaccines, when this will not necessarily be the case. I would think that an inventory at some stage should be required.
There's a story on CNN about queues forming outside some US pharmacies of people hoping to claim an unusued leftover virus at the end of each day.
That may well be true, though probably they would be queuing for the vaccine...
What is the plan for under 18s? Not heard anything on this, are the pharma companies starting trials for them yet, or is the plan just to leave them unvaccinated indefinitely?
I read yesterday that companies are testing under 18 vaccines.
Johnson on the right side, for a change. Border controls is mostly (identified and threatening geographically specific mutant viruses excepted) people trying to fight last year's war.
Why? Nobody should be travelling anyway. This is the perfect time to shut the borders and then slowly open them up again as the world vaccinates.
That's not actually true. The list of legitimate reasons applies.
Mandatory hotel quarantine would make people think twice about whether their trip was actually essential. There are very few reasons people *need* to travel internationally in the middle of a pandemic.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
I think that the amount of ‘unused” vaccines is rather exaggerated, as it does not take into consideration the wasted jabs (for example the Pfizer vaccine only has a 5 hour shelf life once opened, and if there are no-shows, then it cannot be saved). My wife had a jab last week (earlier than expected) as there was availability due to no-shows, and the vaccine would otherwise have had to be discarded. It would not surprise me if there is a lot of this kind of waste that goes unreported. Going forward, this discrepancy will only grow, making it look as though health authorities are stockpiling, or sitting on vaccines, when this will not necessarily be the case. I would think that an inventory at some stage should be required.
There's a story on CNN about queues forming outside some US pharmacies of people hoping to claim an unusued leftover virus at the end of each day.
That may well be true, though probably they would be queuing for the vaccine...
The virus is a free gift from joining the queue.
Buy one vaccine get 2 viruses free!
It’s the USA, it won’t be free. That’s socialist.
Most capitalists use freebies to entice - there is a long game with this offer if you think about it...
I am not sure that you can make the case that vaccinating our own population first is the moral thing to do but that doesn't matter. We elect and pay for governments to protect us and that requires them to ensure that we are protected and that our economy is back up and running again ASAP. All lives may be equal in some ethical plane but they are not and should not be in the eyes of our own government.
It also seems that internationally this current shortage of vaccines is going to be a short term thing of a few months at the most. By the time we are finished vaccinating our population (by end May) quantity of vaccine will not be the issue. The issues will be the cost and delivery systems and we should help with both. Our aid budget should arguably be increased this year and next and certainly focused on providing vaccine and the staff needed to deliver it to countries that are struggling to afford it themselves. It also appears that the Astra Zeneca vaccine produced in the UK is going to be ideal for this purpose because of its ease of handling and shelf life in a normal fridge.
We have, at considerable expense, created a new industry in this country. We want to ensure that this industry thrives, generates further investment, skills, jobs and exports. Using our aid budget to guarantee them demand for their product for the foreseeable is an obvious way to proceed and ensures that we have the capacity to react if the variants take a nasty turn and these vaccines become like the annual flu jab rather than a one off.
What is the plan for under 18s? Not heard anything on this, are the pharma companies starting trials for them yet, or is the plan just to leave them unvaccinated indefinitely?
I read yesterday that companies are testing under 18 vaccines.
It’s about a dozen, isn’t it?
(Boring pedant enjoys cheap, pointless score on grammar )
I am not sure that you can make the case that vaccinating our own population first is the moral thing to do but that doesn't matter. We elect and pay for governments to protect us and that requires them to ensure that we are protected and that our economy is back up and running again ASAP. All lives may be equal in some ethical plane but they are not and should not be in the eyes of our own government.
It also seems that internationally this current shortage of vaccines is going to be a short term thing of a few months at the most. By the time we are finished vaccinating our population (by end May) quantity of vaccine will not be the issue. The issues will be the cost and delivery systems and we should help with both. Our aid budget should arguably be increased this year and next and certainly focused on providing vaccine and the staff needed to deliver it to countries that are struggling to afford it themselves. It also appears that the Astra Zeneca vaccine produced in the UK is going to be ideal for this purpose because of its ease of handling and shelf life in a normal fridge.
We have, at considerable expense, created a new industry in this country. We want to ensure that this industry thrives, generates further investment, skills, jobs and exports. Using our aid budget to guarantee them demand for their product for the foreseeable is an obvious way to proceed and ensures that we have the capacity to react if the variants take a nasty turn and these vaccines become like the annual flu jab rather than a one off.
All true. Excellent post.
Just a shame our aid budget has been cut this year instead.
Johnson on the right side, for a change. Border controls is mostly (identified and threatening geographically specific mutant viruses excepted) people trying to fight last year's war.
Why? Nobody should be travelling anyway. This is the perfect time to shut the borders and then slowly open them up again as the world vaccinates.
That's not actually true. The list of legitimate reasons applies.
Its absurd. So far we have been lucky that non of the mutant strains have defeated the efficacy of the vaccines. We've done such a sensational job in getting this advanced with the vaccination programme, yet risk it all by not even doing basic checks of people coming into the country.
Whatever happened to wanting to Take Back Control of our borders? Who is leaning on Shagger to stop him doing this and why? We've seen time after time that the Tories have used the Pandemic to hand vast amounts of cash to their mates, so I assume there is a financial reason for the idiocy.
I expect we are not checking that people are leaving the country for legitimate reasons, so have little option but to let them back in. We are locked down and should only travel for essential reasons, and should have to prove it before being allowed to get on the plane.
I am not sure that you can make the case that vaccinating our own population first is the moral thing to do but that doesn't matter. We elect and pay for governments to protect us and that requires them to ensure that we are protected and that our economy is back up and running again ASAP. All lives may be equal in some ethical plane but they are not and should not be in the eyes of our own government.
It also seems that internationally this current shortage of vaccines is going to be a short term thing of a few months at the most. By the time we are finished vaccinating our population (by end May) quantity of vaccine will not be the issue. The issues will be the cost and delivery systems and we should help with both. Our aid budget should arguably be increased this year and next and certainly focused on providing vaccine and the staff needed to deliver it to countries that are struggling to afford it themselves. It also appears that the Astra Zeneca vaccine produced in the UK is going to be ideal for this purpose because of its ease of handling and shelf life in a normal fridge.
We have, at considerable expense, created a new industry in this country. We want to ensure that this industry thrives, generates further investment, skills, jobs and exports. Using our aid budget to guarantee them demand for their product for the foreseeable is an obvious way to proceed and ensures that we have the capacity to react if the variants take a nasty turn and these vaccines become like the annual flu jab rather than a one off.
All true. Excellent post.
Just a shame our aid budget has been cut this year instead.
I am hoping that there will be exceptional payments specifically for vaccines. As soon as we get our own economy up and running it is very much in our interests that everyone else does too. There is a huge amount of short term and longer term self interest in this.
What is the plan for under 18s? Not heard anything on this, are the pharma companies starting trials for them yet, or is the plan just to leave them unvaccinated indefinitely?
Pfizer is doing a study on Secondary school aged children in the USA.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
Yep - but that would probably breach some human "right"
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
Yes. Bad precedent. Enforce the home isolation, but I draw a line at detention. Do it once and you lower the bar in future.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
Yes. Bad precedent. Enforce the home isolation of you must, but I draw a line at detention.
I am normally pretty liberal but can't see how enforced quarantine is not justified in this scenario which will only happen about once every hundred years, and only to those who choose to travel internationally.
We will probably wait for it to spread widely, then panic and introduce enforced quarantine when community transmission in the UK is high, at which point it will have become close to pointless, and I will be probably be against it!
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
My understanding is that flights from SA have been banned meantime so there shouldn't be people arriving from SA. But it is, once again, too late. The variant is already here and if it is like the Kent variant it will spread quickly because it seems to have a significant advantage in transmissibility.
I have been deeply frustrated by our border policy for a full year now. I have little doubt that at the end of the day we will find it was the largest cause of the second wave and over 70k deaths. It has been just incomprehensible. Hopefully, by the end of May it will no longer matter because we will be safe but the cost has been terrible.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
Yes. Bad precedent. Enforce the home isolation of you must, but I draw a line at detention.
I am normally pretty liberal but can't see how enforced quarantine is not justified in this scenario which will only happen about once every hundred years, and only to those who choose to travel internationally.
We will probably wait for it to spread widely, then panic and introduce enforced quarantine when community transmission in the UK is high, at which point it will have become close to pointless, and I will be probably be against it!
Person A arrives home from SA and is forced to quarantine in a hotel. They have no symptoms. Person B works in said hotel, comes into contact with them, and then gets a temperature. Why is person B trusted to isolate at home and person A not?
Edit - The point being that you end up quarantining person B as well, and you’re on a slippery slope.
One aspect of the vaccines to the developing world issue we haven’t discussed is that there is growing evidence that soon the less obese, younger, poorer south of the world may not need them as badly as we assume. We are focussing too much on how we have experienced this pandemic. The article in the FT I link below suggests that the impossibility of social distancing in much of India has led to herd immunity being reached in many of their major cities already. I posted an article yesterday from Sky suggesting the current massive drop in cases in South Africa was for the same or a similar reason - their new variant having speeded things along (NB I actually think we may be seeing something similar but with a tragic death toll as a result).
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
I’m not saying you specifically want to fuck the EU (though I’m pretty sure posters on here have used that phrase literally), but why would these two positions be exclusive? They would both be a pretty good fit for the EUrophobes whose constant refrain has been divide & conquer and let’s get Ireland back in the UK.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
Yes. Bad precedent. Enforce the home isolation, but I draw a line at detention. Do it once and you lower the bar in future.
But we already have detention. Even if we haven't been abroad we need to stay at home at penalty of breaking the law without a legal justification for why we have left the house. Children can't even go to school.
The choice isn't no restrictions or quarantine, the choice is quarantine of people who have chosen to travel, to help reduce the home detention the entire country has at the minute.
Quarantine after travel would be an informed choice - if you don't want to quarantine then don't travel and go ahead with your life relatively normally. Being told to stay at home, not go to school, nobody has a choice over that.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
I am not a scientist but even I have got that most viruses mutate to increase their transmissibility. Any such mutation is likely to become rapidly dominant for that reason as the Kent variant has here.
Viruses that haven't mutated in this way, like the HIV virus, are much easier to control. Corona viruses seem particularly prone to this and so long as there is a large pool of infection world wide there will be a risk that a variant immune to our vaccines will develop over time. This is why it is self interest as well as morals that should drive our international efforts to reduce the incidence of this disease and the pool within which such variants can occur.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news, though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Over-18 population of RoI is only about 4m people. Once UK is at the point of massive vaccine centres in exhibition halls and car parks, helping the country with which we share a land border get their population also vaccinated is in our collective best interest. Not only will we send them some vaccines, we'll probably send them a load of (vaccinated) tourists over the summer too.
They hail the disinfection of streets, etc here in Spain all the time - it is deflection exercise to pretend something is being done. Even the most charitable analysis would suggest it ca n only kill the virus until the next carries touches the relevant surface. However, if you question the point of it the criticisms rain down in full force....according to a 'friend' on Facebook
My public sector workplace is still spending £'00,000s on "enhanced cleaning" - and there's nobody even there!
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
I don't think we should ever be in a position to not be able to use the jabs that we have. If we can get our hands on a million jabs per day then we should be using a million jabs per day. If we could get our hands on two million jabs per day then we should use two million jabs per day - in that scenario we could vaccinate the entire nation in a month, then be concentrating on the rest of the world.
If our hospitals and GP surgeries are running to capacity then we should be opening drive through and similar centres.
Quarantine after travel was a simple policy. During the periods where non-essential travel abroad was restricted, insist that all incoming people quarantine in airport hotels. Collect them off the plane, onto a bus, into the hotel. We certainly had the ability to do so - surplus hotel space existed. So why didn't we? And why - even now with people having to go door to door to try and mop up this SA strain - aren't we doing it now?
Three possibilities, none of which are mutually exclusive: 1. "Global Britain, Open for Business". Politically it was so important post Brexit to have Britain open that it trumped all other considerations including public health 2. Pressure from Tory donors. We have watched agog at the brazen way the Tories have handed out vast amounts of public money to their friends. And we had that amazing announcement that travel restrictions would no longer apply to captains of industry like their friends. So rich Tory friends/benefactors/donors telling the cabinet not to do it would have been influential 3. Boris is crap. He has proven utterly incapable of taking tough decisions or doing anything unpopular until its absolutely unavoidable
A stupid, corrupt fool really isn't who we needed to be "leading" us through this crisis. Which is why so many of us have died or been badly infected unnecessarily.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
But surely the sort of testing regime we are running which is no longer based purely on symptomatic cases would ick up such a large increase in asymptomatic cases. And it has not. I don't deny your logic, only that the evidence does not currently seem to support it.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
I think that the amount of ‘unused” vaccines is rather exaggerated, as it does not take into consideration the wasted jabs (for example the Pfizer vaccine only has a 5 hour shelf life once opened, and if there are no-shows, then it cannot be saved). My wife had a jab last week (earlier than expected) as there was availability due to no-shows, and the vaccine would otherwise have had to be discarded. It would not surprise me if there is a lot of this kind of waste that goes unreported. Going forward, this discrepancy will only grow, making it look as though health authorities are stockpiling, or sitting on vaccines, when this will not necessarily be the case. I would think that an inventory at some stage should be required.
There's a story on CNN about queues forming outside some US pharmacies of people hoping to claim an unusued leftover virus at the end of each day.
That may well be true, though probably they would be queuing for the vaccine...
The virus is a free gift from joining the queue.
Buy one vaccine get 2 viruses free!
It’s the USA, it won’t be free. That’s socialist.
Most capitalists use freebies to entice - there is a long game with this offer if you think about it...
"There ain't no such thing as a free virus vaccine"
One aspect of the vaccines to the developing world issue we haven’t discussed is that there is growing evidence that soon the less obese, younger, poorer south of the world may not need them as badly as we assume. We are focussing too much on how we have experienced this pandemic. The article in the FT I link below suggests that the impossibility of social distancing in much of India has led to herd immunity being reached in many of their major cities already. I posted an article yesterday from Sky suggesting the current massive drop in cases in South Africa was for the same or a similar reason - their new variant having speeded things along (NB I actually think we may be seeing something similar but with a tragic death toll as a result).
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
"When it has vaccinated or obtained doses for all its population, then it can – and should – help other countries who are in a less fortunate position."
Should that - for selfish, fence-mending reasons - be the EU we help?
Or should we instead help developing countries? Luxembourg or Libreville? Spain - or Port of Spain?
Arguably, the EU countries are having a harder time from Covid than many developing countries, through age profile or - frankly, who knows why. Perhaps our surplus vaccines could do most good there, in terms of alleviating death and suffering. But those developing countries have not had any chance to splash out billions to develop vaccine facilities. Germany or France or Netherlands have had a choice - but have not seen fit to put out the billions that the UK/USA have done.
It's Aesop's The Ant and the Grasshopper made very real.
We seem obsessed by this question of helping the EU. Realistically, by the point at which everyone in the UK is covered (say end May to get 50 million adults both doses), then the EU will be receiving big shipments of vaccines and won't need any of ours.
So, it's not clear to me why we seem to be obsessing over a scenario which is unlikely to actually happen.
It really should be obvious! UK political geeks obsessing and emotionally overreacting to the EU? Quelle surprise.
As I pointed out earlier, the EU has 2.3 billion of its own vaccines on order. They too will be swimming in them as will the USA.
What will limit effectiveness across the world is the healthcare infrastructure to effectively distribute to the right age range. In Sub Saharan Africa nearly half the population is under 18 years old. Identifying and vaccinating the at risk population would be quite tricky.
At the moment, while countries wait impatiently for Godot they should be doing the detailed logistical planning for that infrastructure. Few countries have as efficient a vaccination register and well integrated primary care as our NHS.
On the other hand is there not a potential danger that because of western perceptions and experience of Covid as being THE thread to public health, vaccine distribution efforts around the developing world may potentially interfere with existing public health programmes that are of far greater relevance to those countries?
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
Agreed, although the peak distribution capacity is probably a couple of million doses a day if we have every GP surgery, pharmacy and a number of huge regional drive-through venues open.
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
"I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good"
Agreed. But we do not know where that will be in a fast moving pandemic, lets wait and decide closer to the time, which is the governments sensible (non) decision.
I am not sure that you can make the case that vaccinating our own population first is the moral thing to do but that doesn't matter. We elect and pay for governments to protect us and that requires them to ensure that we are protected and that our economy is back up and running again ASAP. All lives may be equal in some ethical plane but they are not and should not be in the eyes of our own government.
It also seems that internationally this current shortage of vaccines is going to be a short term thing of a few months at the most. By the time we are finished vaccinating our population (by end May) quantity of vaccine will not be the issue. The issues will be the cost and delivery systems and we should help with both. Our aid budget should arguably be increased this year and next and certainly focused on providing vaccine and the staff needed to deliver it to countries that are struggling to afford it themselves. It also appears that the Astra Zeneca vaccine produced in the UK is going to be ideal for this purpose because of its ease of handling and shelf life in a normal fridge.
We have, at considerable expense, created a new industry in this country. We want to ensure that this industry thrives, generates further investment, skills, jobs and exports. Using our aid budget to guarantee them demand for their product for the foreseeable is an obvious way to proceed and ensures that we have the capacity to react if the variants take a nasty turn and these vaccines become like the annual flu jab rather than a one off.
All true. Excellent post.
Just a shame our aid budget has been cut this year instead.
Foreign office must have a massive surplus though.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Its a tricky one and comes down to whether all lives are equal...? I'm of the opinion the vaccine situation is like two wealthy fat (white) men arguing over a piece of cake while a poor hungry person watches from a distance..
But the nature of a vaccine makes that analogy not applicable. It is one person, one vaccination. It is not 'rich people iniquitously hording' the vaccine. For strong medical reasons, we need to stamp the disease out here, not let it back in, and then we'll be in a position to eliminate it country by country. We have over-ordered doses and the time when we have enough confirmed doses to do the UK and can look elsewhere must be near.
Some briefings coming out of ROI suggest they 'do not want' our vaccines - however we should still make the offer formally, unless by that time the EU has ramped up sufficiently to make helping them obsolete. I don't think the Government of the Republic would turn down help for political reasons, but if they would, their population deserves to know - indeed centres could be set up in the North to offer to vaccinate any ROI passport holders.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
The thing that anyone who wants to "vaccinate the world" misses is not only is it immoral to be sending vaccines away before we have vaccinated our own, it is absolutely ineffective too.
Lets say we send 7 million doses from the UK to abroad. That's enough to vaccinate more than 10% of the UK population - or not even 0.1% of the global population.
By the time we are done vaccinating the vulnerable then we should be a matter of weeks away from vaccinating everyone if we continue to ramp up and vaccinate everyone we can domestically. Finishing the job then being able to get everyone back to normal, and turning attention abroad to eradicating the bug will be far more productive than people still having to be restricted at home and doing a half-arsed job abroad.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
The mutation that increased transmissibility weakened the virus either endogenous or exogenously so it has a shorter life span
"When it has vaccinated or obtained doses for all its population, then it can – and should – help other countries who are in a less fortunate position."
Should that - for selfish, fence-mending reasons - be the EU we help?
Or should we instead help developing countries? Luxembourg or Libreville? Spain - or Port of Spain?
Arguably, the EU countries are having a harder time from Covid than many developing countries, through age profile or - frankly, who knows why. Perhaps our surplus vaccines could do most good there, in terms of alleviating death and suffering. But those developing countries have not had any chance to splash out billions to develop vaccine facilities. Germany or France or Netherlands have had a choice - but have not seen fit to put out the billions that the UK/USA have done.
It's Aesop's The Ant and the Grasshopper made very real.
We seem obsessed by this question of helping the EU. Realistically, by the point at which everyone in the UK is covered (say end May to get 50 million adults both doses), then the EU will be receiving big shipments of vaccines and won't need any of ours.
So, it's not clear to me why we seem to be obsessing over a scenario which is unlikely to actually happen.
It really should be obvious! UK political geeks obsessing and emotionally overreacting to the EU? Quelle surprise.
As I pointed out earlier, the EU has 2.3 billion of its own vaccines on order. They too will be swimming in them as will the USA.
What will limit effectiveness across the world is the healthcare infrastructure to effectively distribute to the right age range. In Sub Saharan Africa nearly half the population is under 18 years old. Identifying and vaccinating the at risk population would be quite tricky.
At the moment, while countries wait impatiently for Godot they should be doing the detailed logistical planning for that infrastructure. Few countries have as efficient a vaccination register and well integrated primary care as our NHS.
On the other hand is there not a potential danger that because of western perceptions and experience of Covid as being THE thread to public health, vaccine distribution efforts around the developing world may potentially interfere with existing public health programmes that are of far greater relevance to those countries?
Or to put it another way - if you wanted to get the most bang for your buck in improving the lives and/or public health of people in sub-Saharan Africa, how high up the list would supplying and investing in Covid vaccination delivery be?
To be fair the door-to-door testing in response to the SA variant is very good and proactive. Matt Hancock does seem to be coming into his own as the pandemic has progressed.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
Mr. Divvie, using jabs isn't the same as hoarding them.
By definition, when they're used, that vaccine dose is gone.
Hoarding them is what the SNP appears to be doing with their stockpiles.
How can you know that? Releasing numbers of vaccine stocks would be a breach of national security according to HMG.
There's no UK vaccine stocks, except in Scotland.
The sensitive numbers are the future deliveries, for reasons that should be apparent from the last week's news.
Weirdly excited voice: The UK is going to have access to X hundred million vaccines this year!
Solemnly serious voice: The numbers for future deliveries of vaccines are VERY sensitive.
Weirdly excited voice again: Ireland will be biting our hand off for some of our hundreds of millions of vaccines!
It's not about the UK. It's about poor VDL.
I know this is going to hurt (stretches the brain) , but imagine someone who is literally worse at her job than all those "London Politicians". SLAB would have kicked her out....
She has industriously proved this in a career of perfect failure, spanning decades.
Those vaccine numbers would upset her. And when she gets upset... well it's not good.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
I don't think we should ever be in a position to not be able to use the jabs that we have. If we can get our hands on a million jabs per day then we should be using a million jabs per day. If we could get our hands on two million jabs per day then we should use two million jabs per day - in that scenario we could vaccinate the entire nation in a month, then be concentrating on the rest of the world.
If our hospitals and GP surgeries are running to capacity then we should be opening drive through and similar centres.
...staffed by who?
Your last sentence misses point 2 below, that the vaccination rate is limited by:
1. Vaccine supply 2. Staff to give vaccines and manage sites 3. Vaccination sites 4. Willing vaccination recipients
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
RCS has made the point through this pandemic that even without lockdowns there are waves to the pandemic.
Virus spreads, cases and hospitalisations rise, people become scared, people stay at home (whether enforced or voluntary), cases fall, people stop being afraid, people go out, virus spreads etc
In both the UK and SA the new variant led to a scary rise in hospitalisations etc - thus meaning people who had become jaded and more confident about the whole thing were suddenly much more likely to take social distancing seriously.
To be fair the door-to-door testing in response to the SA variant is very good and proactive. Matt Hancock does seem to be coming into his own as the pandemic has progressed.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
But surely the sort of testing regime we are running which is no longer based purely on symptomatic cases would ick up such a large increase in asymptomatic cases. And it has not. I don't deny your logic, only that the evidence does not currently seem to support it.
You are absolutely right that my conclusion with respect to the U.K. has no evidence and I probably should not have stretched my point that far. But there is evidence in respect of India and South Africa where there has been significant antibody testing quoted in the pieces I posted this morning and yesterday evening and I don’t think it unreasonable, given the similar shape of ours and SA’s graphs, to throw it out there as a hypothesis.
This pandemic will end come what may - either with an unbearable body count (particularly in the west) or with vaccines. Thankfully we seem to be on the second route out now but our appalling death toll already sometimes makes me think we’re taking some sort of middle route. Ferguson et al said in their famous paper last March that reaching natural herd immunity would kill half a million. We may well get to a quarter of a million.
The virus will indeed mutate but immunity is not a zero sum game. COVID is not Captain Trips - having got it or been vaccinated or infected our bodies will always have enough memory of fighting it the first time to have a much more effective defence the second.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
8.29 this morning.
You can persist in doing something once? A novel interpretation of the English language.
Interesting article but much weaker than the high standard generally Cyclefree sets. It amounts, with lots of huffing and puffing, to a series of assertions followed by a moral conclusion to which no foundation has been given and no different in kind from 'Put America First'. It may be right, but I don't know why Cyclefree thinks that is so.
What is the plan for under 18s? Not heard anything on this, are the pharma companies starting trials for them yet, or is the plan just to leave them unvaccinated indefinitely?
I read yesterday that companies are testing under 18 vaccines.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
Mr. Pioneers, it's odd to see you wrote that I both, in your view, wanted to '**** the EU' and give our first surplus doses of vaccine to the Republic of Ireland.
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. I said that I am not blaming you for the fck the EU noise but you can't deny that it hasn't been all over both the press and this forum since they shat the bed over the Astra Zeneca contract. Nor did I suggest that you said we give our first surplus doses to ROI.
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
I think it still comes back to the basic point that the EU has it within its capacity to help itself whilst much of Africa does not. Moreover given that countries such as France are both heavily anti-vax in general and are led by a man who is specifically anti much of what we have to offer I would suggest that we should also be putting the vaccine where it is likely to do the most good. Sadly that is not France.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
I don't think we should ever be in a position to not be able to use the jabs that we have. If we can get our hands on a million jabs per day then we should be using a million jabs per day. If we could get our hands on two million jabs per day then we should use two million jabs per day - in that scenario we could vaccinate the entire nation in a month, then be concentrating on the rest of the world.
If our hospitals and GP surgeries are running to capacity then we should be opening drive through and similar centres.
...staffed by who?
Your last sentence misses point 2 below, that the vaccination rate is limited by:
1. Vaccine supply 2. Staff to give vaccines and manage sites 3. Vaccination sites 4. Willing vaccination recipients
In that order.
Staffed by anyone who can do it. Any doctors, nurses etc who can volunteer. Or anyone from the army who can volunteer. Or any vets that can volunteer. Or anyone else who can do it. Anyone who can wield a needle.
One aspect of the vaccines to the developing world issue we haven’t discussed is that there is growing evidence that soon the less obese, younger, poorer south of the world may not need them as badly as we assume. We are focussing too much on how we have experienced this pandemic. The article in the FT I link below suggests that the impossibility of social distancing in much of India has led to herd immunity being reached in many of their major cities already. I posted an article yesterday from Sky suggesting the current massive drop in cases in South Africa was for the same or a similar reason - their new variant having speeded things along (NB I actually think we may be seeing something similar but with a tragic death toll as a result).
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
India is also producing well over 1.5bn covid vaccines this year, generally it produces 60% of world supply of vaccines.
1.5bn AZ and 1bn Novavax and around 1bn of a domestic one which is in P3 trials. India is definitely a vaccine powerhouse, however the west can't rely on India as India has already said it's vaccines will be reserved for domestic use or be sold/given to developing nations. It, fairly, thinks that rich western countries can fend for themselves.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
8.29 this morning.
You can persist in doing something once? A novel interpretation of the English language.
@Cyclefree: Not one of your finest imo - I struggle to see how it would be immoral to share vaccines at any stage.
I happen to agree that we should vaccinate UK residents first, then help Ireland (because: CTA, land border, and we owe them lots), then help the rest of the world, particularly 3rd world.
But I support this approach for purely selfish and political reasons - nothing to do with morality.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
8.29 this morning.
You can persist in doing something once? A novel interpretation of the English language.
Nope. I just answered your question. You asked for the last post in which you did that. I obliged.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Scottish nationalists wrongly assume (they have a tendency toward the simplistic) that non-Scots have the same racist hatred of Scots that many of their nationalistic brethren have of the English
Mr. Divvie, using jabs isn't the same as hoarding them.
By definition, when they're used, that vaccine dose is gone.
Hoarding them is what the SNP appears to be doing with their stockpiles.
How can you know that? Releasing numbers of vaccine stocks would be a breach of national security according to HMG.
There's no UK vaccine stocks, except in Scotland.
The sensitive numbers are the future deliveries, for reasons that should be apparent from the last week's news.
Weirdly excited voice: The UK is going to have access to X hundred million vaccines this year!
Solemnly serious voice: The numbers for future deliveries of vaccines are VERY sensitive.
Weirdly excited voice again: Ireland will be biting our hand off for some of our hundreds of millions of vaccines!
It's not about the UK. It's about poor VDL.
I know this is going to hurt (stretches the brain) , but imagine someone who is literally worse at her job than all those "London Politicians". SLAB would have kicked her out....
She has industriously proved this in a career of perfect failure, spanning decades.
Those vaccine numbers would upset her. And when she gets upset... well it's not good.
And Macron might start channeling Trump again...
Sorry, your posts only have veracity when they include a confirmatory anecdote about an acquaintance telling you this or a friend reporting that. Which is most of them tbf.
One aspect of the vaccines to the developing world issue we haven’t discussed is that there is growing evidence that soon the less obese, younger, poorer south of the world may not need them as badly as we assume. We are focussing too much on how we have experienced this pandemic. The article in the FT I link below suggests that the impossibility of social distancing in much of India has led to herd immunity being reached in many of their major cities already. I posted an article yesterday from Sky suggesting the current massive drop in cases in South Africa was for the same or a similar reason - their new variant having speeded things along (NB I actually think we may be seeing something similar but with a tragic death toll as a result).
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
India is also producing well over 1.5bn covid vaccines this year, generally it produces 60% of world supply of vaccines.
1.5bn AZ and 1bn Novavax and around 1bn of a domestic one which is in P3 trials. India is definitely a vaccine powerhouse, however the west can't rely on India as India has already said it's vaccines will be reserved for domestic use or be sold/given to developing nations. It, fairly, thinks that rich western countries can fend for themselves.
Off topic, but one week today my family fly up to Aberdeen in advance of our house move a week on Wednesday. Some *interesting* weather look to be coming!!!
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news, though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
8.29 this morning.
You can persist in doing something once? A novel interpretation of the English language.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
But surely the sort of testing regime we are running which is no longer based purely on symptomatic cases would ick up such a large increase in asymptomatic cases. And it has not. I don't deny your logic, only that the evidence does not currently seem to support it.
You are absolutely right that my conclusion with respect to the U.K. has no evidence and I probably should not have stretched my point that far. But there is evidence in respect of India and South Africa where there has been significant antibody testing quoted in the pieces I posted this morning and yesterday evening and I don’t think it unreasonable, given the similar shape of ours and SA’s graphs, to throw it out there as a hypothesis.
This pandemic will end come what may - either with an unbearable body count (particularly in the west) or with vaccines. Thankfully we seem to be on the second route out now but our appalling death toll already sometimes makes me think we’re taking some sort of middle route. Ferguson et al said in their famous paper last March that reaching natural herd immunity would kill half a million. We may well get to a quarter of a million.
The virus will indeed mutate but immunity is not a zero sum game. COVID is not Captain Trips - having got it or been vaccinated or infected our bodies will always have enough memory of fighting it the first time to have a much more effective defence the second.
I'll be surprised if it breaches 150,000 dead in the UK - unless a new mutation goes round the back of our vaccines. A couple more weeks in the higher hundreds then the low hundreds - and down to daily deaths in double figures by the end of March.
This kind of thing seems inevitable, as does the eventual need for a vaccine specifically targeted at the SA and Brazil mutations. I hope that we will not have to wait too long before work begins to develop vaccines designed to protect against these variants.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
Mr. Divvie, using jabs isn't the same as hoarding them.
By definition, when they're used, that vaccine dose is gone.
Hoarding them is what the SNP appears to be doing with their stockpiles.
How can you know that? Releasing numbers of vaccine stocks would be a breach of national security according to HMG.
There's no UK vaccine stocks, except in Scotland.
The sensitive numbers are the future deliveries, for reasons that should be apparent from the last week's news.
Weirdly excited voice: The UK is going to have access to X hundred million vaccines this year!
Solemnly serious voice: The numbers for future deliveries of vaccines are VERY sensitive.
Weirdly excited voice again: Ireland will be biting our hand off for some of our hundreds of millions of vaccines!
It's not about the UK. It's about poor VDL.
I know this is going to hurt (stretches the brain) , but imagine someone who is literally worse at her job than all those "London Politicians". SLAB would have kicked her out....
She has industriously proved this in a career of perfect failure, spanning decades.
Those vaccine numbers would upset her. And when she gets upset... well it's not good.
And Macron might start channeling Trump again...
Sorry, your posts only have veracity when they include a confirmatory anecdote about an acquaintance telling you this or a friend reporting that. Which is most of them tbf.
To be fair the door-to-door testing in response to the SA variant is very good and proactive. Matt Hancock does seem to be coming into his own as the pandemic has progressed.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
This is probably a false perception on my part but it does seem to me that, in areas where Hancock has control of what is being done, he is making the right decisions and doing well. But once it is areas where Johnson or the wider cabinet have an input, the decision making gets poorer very quickly. Sadly I think there are still too many people in cabinet who don't understand that the best way to get the economy back on track - which appears to be their main driving factor - is to absolutely kill this virus by any means possible.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
To be fair the door-to-door testing in response to the SA variant is very good and proactive. Matt Hancock does seem to be coming into his own as the pandemic has progressed.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
It's inexcusable.
Airport testing would be a start, but apparently we cannot use completely unobtrusive measures like remote temperature reading, or lightly intrusive measures like the rapid lateral tests that give results in half an hour, because they are not completely reliable.
It is like the start of the pandemic when we rejected mask testing because, unlike surgeons, the public might touch their faces which could be problematic if they needed to perform an emergency heart transplant in the middle of Sainsbury's.
Scientist on R4 making the point that similar mutations are cropping up independently across the world.
Viruses mutate all the time. Suggesting this has only happened in SA, the UK and Brazil is naive.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
The mutation that increased transmissibility weakened the virus either endogenous or exogenously so it has a shorter life span
Nobody can reliably predict the course of the pandemic. By the time some countries are in a position to scale up vaccination to nationwide levels, they may decide that it is no longer necessary.
One aspect of the vaccines to the developing world issue we haven’t discussed is that there is growing evidence that soon the less obese, younger, poorer south of the world may not need them as badly as we assume. We are focussing too much on how we have experienced this pandemic. The article in the FT I link below suggests that the impossibility of social distancing in much of India has led to herd immunity being reached in many of their major cities already. I posted an article yesterday from Sky suggesting the current massive drop in cases in South Africa was for the same or a similar reason - their new variant having speeded things along (NB I actually think we may be seeing something similar but with a tragic death toll as a result).
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
I agree with all this. Ironically, the underdeveloped world may catch up a little with the developed world as a result. Office space in Sao Paulo, Brazil may become a good business investment as most offices in London are still closed.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
"A prime UK commentator" who is pimping out car insurance in the middle of his video, with a "ticker" on his video pimping out car insurance?
And who agrees with what you want politically?
I'd not been thinking about the last bit actually! But he was thought worthy to be editor and columnist on a number of newspapers till quite recently.
So he used to be "a prime UK commentator" perhaps, doesn't mean he still is today - if he was he wouldn't be doing a rather poor Wynne Evans impersonation.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. Just type the word into the search box on PB VF you get the below. You and another prominent Scottish Nationalist use it every other day. No one else does.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
Mr. Divvie, using jabs isn't the same as hoarding them.
By definition, when they're used, that vaccine dose is gone.
Hoarding them is what the SNP appears to be doing with their stockpiles.
How can you know that? Releasing numbers of vaccine stocks would be a breach of national security according to HMG.
There's no UK vaccine stocks, except in Scotland.
The sensitive numbers are the future deliveries, for reasons that should be apparent from the last week's news.
Weirdly excited voice: The UK is going to have access to X hundred million vaccines this year!
Solemnly serious voice: The numbers for future deliveries of vaccines are VERY sensitive.
Weirdly excited voice again: Ireland will be biting our hand off for some of our hundreds of millions of vaccines!
It's not about the UK. It's about poor VDL.
I know this is going to hurt (stretches the brain) , but imagine someone who is literally worse at her job than all those "London Politicians". SLAB would have kicked her out....
She has industriously proved this in a career of perfect failure, spanning decades.
Those vaccine numbers would upset her. And when she gets upset... well it's not good.
And Macron might start channeling Trump again...
Sorry, your posts only have veracity when they include a confirmatory anecdote about an acquaintance telling you this or a friend reporting that. Which is most of them tbf.
She is, but so is Boris, and so is (or was) Trump. And several of the corporate VPs I've worked under.
WW2 analogies are always helpful and it has been theorised that the rapid rotation of American generals between theatres where they were bogged down, rather than condeming them as failures to be consigned to outer darkness, was key to allied success.
"When it has vaccinated or obtained doses for all its population, then it can – and should – help other countries who are in a less fortunate position."
Should that - for selfish, fence-mending reasons - be the EU we help?
Or should we instead help developing countries? Luxembourg or Libreville? Spain - or Port of Spain?
Arguably, the EU countries are having a harder time from Covid than many developing countries, through age profile or - frankly, who knows why. Perhaps our surplus vaccines could do most good there, in terms of alleviating death and suffering. But those developing countries have not had any chance to splash out billions to develop vaccine facilities. Germany or France or Netherlands have had a choice - but have not seen fit to put out the billions that the UK/USA have done.
It's Aesop's The Ant and the Grasshopper made very real.
We seem obsessed by this question of helping the EU. Realistically, by the point at which everyone in the UK is covered (say end May to get 50 million adults both doses), then the EU will be receiving big shipments of vaccines and won't need any of ours.
So, it's not clear to me why we seem to be obsessing over a scenario which is unlikely to actually happen.
It really should be obvious! UK political geeks obsessing and emotionally overreacting to the EU? Quelle surprise.
Yes, but its also simply that at this moment in time they are struggling with supplies, and implying we have diverted some of theirs to ourselves.
Naturally people focus on the problem now and aren't taking into account that the EU portfolio will be fine, it's just been slower to start arriving, and that won't continue.
We are not there yet but if (i) vaccines are in limited supply and (ii) the UK has vaccinated sufficiently to control the virus and substantially reopen, it not IMMORAL (in fact it is quite the contrary) to argue that the priority should then be in countries where the virus is raging.
Furthermore this is the most rational approach for a global pandemic. It must be defeated globally otherwise it will be back to bite us with vicious imported mutations and we will be stuck in this twilight world for years.
The header is great but is playing to the gallery.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news, though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Marvellously prescient to run a poll on the 28-29th Jan to cause a distraction 3 days later.
At least running it in the middle of the vaccine nationalist spasm shows how much resonance that had outside the PB herd. Thank goodness as we were still reeling from the body blows of blue envelopes and Hanoi Nic.
Comments
Not testing on children has been one of the consequences of trying to cram years of trials into months. Who would have volunteered their own children for trials of an untested vaccine, for a disease which doesn't seem to affect children much at all?
It also seems that internationally this current shortage of vaccines is going to be a short term thing of a few months at the most. By the time we are finished vaccinating our population (by end May) quantity of vaccine will not be the issue. The issues will be the cost and delivery systems and we should help with both. Our aid budget should arguably be increased this year and next and certainly focused on providing vaccine and the staff needed to deliver it to countries that are struggling to afford it themselves. It also appears that the Astra Zeneca vaccine produced in the UK is going to be ideal for this purpose because of its ease of handling and shelf life in a normal fridge.
We have, at considerable expense, created a new industry in this country. We want to ensure that this industry thrives, generates further investment, skills, jobs and exports. Using our aid budget to guarantee them demand for their product for the foreseeable is an obvious way to proceed and ensures that we have the capacity to react if the variants take a nasty turn and these vaccines become like the annual flu jab rather than a one off.
(Boring pedant enjoys cheap, pointless score on grammar
Just a shame our aid budget has been cut this year instead.
We will probably wait for it to spread widely, then panic and introduce enforced quarantine when community transmission in the UK is high, at which point it will have become close to pointless, and I will be probably be against it!
The EU is quite rich. Some of the Commonwealth is, much of it is significantly poorer than us. A map posted here yesterday indicated Africa might be struggling with this in 2023 whereas the EU is forecast to finish vaccination by the end of the year.
I have been deeply frustrated by our border policy for a full year now. I have little doubt that at the end of the day we will find it was the largest cause of the second wave and over 70k deaths. It has been just incomprehensible. Hopefully, by the end of May it will no longer matter because we will be safe but the cost has been terrible.
Edit - The point being that you end up quarantining person B as well, and you’re on a slippery slope.
We in the west need vaccines to reach herd immunity without bodies piling up in the streets and thousands hit with long covid - 20% of our population is over 65 as opposed to only 6 or 7% in India, and our rich, sanitary, west has not been exposed throughout childhood to the kind of pathogens that remain rife in poorer parts of the world. Obesity isn’t really a problem in places where many struggle to eat at all. All that means that many parts of the developing world, India at least, may have reached natural herd immunity by the time we have any spare vaccines.
https://www.ft.com/content/07988f31-d511-4af4-8b78-03ecaf2d4df7
If you look back to my first post I specifically said "Great Britain" as opposed to the UK. NI - having been severed from the UK proper by the UK government - is intrinsically linked to ROI from a virus management perspective. If we want to roll the vaccine out in NI then we have to ensure ROI does the same - otherwise what is the point? It would be like vaccinating Lancashire then wondering why Yorkshire kept bringing the virus across the border.
Our government has to put its own people first - that isn't in dispute. But who it puts second and the impact that has on its own people apparently is in question. I'm not suggesting that we help pay for the vaccination programme in France, more than co-operation is required. Which is hard to do because pro-Brexit foamers think that the EU bed shatting proves we were right to leave the EEA.
The choice isn't no restrictions or quarantine, the choice is quarantine of people who have chosen to travel, to help reduce the home detention the entire country has at the minute.
Quarantine after travel would be an informed choice - if you don't want to quarantine then don't travel and go ahead with your life relatively normally. Being told to stay at home, not go to school, nobody has a choice over that.
Viruses that haven't mutated in this way, like the HIV virus, are much easier to control. Corona viruses seem particularly prone to this and so long as there is a large pool of infection world wide there will be a risk that a variant immune to our vaccines will develop over time. This is why it is self interest as well as morals that should drive our international efforts to reduce the incidence of this disease and the pool within which such variants can occur.
What puzzles me is the similarly shaped, up/down, arrowhead shaped graph of cases in both the UK and South Africa in January. Given vaccination hasn’t started in SA yet, either (1) social distancing in both countries has worked incredibly well against both countries’ variants, or (2) both variants’ increased transmissibility has resulted in more infections (many asymptomatic) and thus the early stages of herd immunity emerging amongst the most exposed parts of their populations. I cannot think of a third possibility.
On Cyclefree's original header point, I think the point at which we start to seriously ramp up sending vaccine overseas is when we no longer have the distribution capacity to match the production capacity. I suspect that will come well in advance of everyone that we want being jabbed. Excess production should then be directed overseas. And the time to discus how that is done and who gets help is right now. So we are in a position to put distribution into action the moment that point of excess production arrives.
https://twitter.com/mofl00d/status/1356376282821500931?s=21
If our hospitals and GP surgeries are running to capacity then we should be opening drive through and similar centres.
Three possibilities, none of which are mutually exclusive:
1. "Global Britain, Open for Business". Politically it was so important post Brexit to have Britain open that it trumped all other considerations including public health
2. Pressure from Tory donors. We have watched agog at the brazen way the Tories have handed out vast amounts of public money to their friends. And we had that amazing announcement that travel restrictions would no longer apply to captains of industry like their friends. So rich Tory friends/benefactors/donors telling the cabinet not to do it would have been influential
3. Boris is crap. He has proven utterly incapable of taking tough decisions or doing anything unpopular until its absolutely unavoidable
A stupid, corrupt fool really isn't who we needed to be "leading" us through this crisis. Which is why so many of us have died or been badly infected unnecessarily.
Agreed. But we do not know where that will be in a fast moving pandemic, lets wait and decide closer to the time, which is the governments sensible (non) decision.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Some briefings coming out of ROI suggest they 'do not want' our vaccines - however we should still make the offer formally, unless by that time the EU has ramped up sufficiently to make helping them obsolete. I don't think the Government of the Republic would turn down help for political reasons, but if they would, their population deserves to know - indeed centres could be set up in the North to offer to vaccinate any ROI passport holders.
Lets say we send 7 million doses from the UK to abroad. That's enough to vaccinate more than 10% of the UK population - or not even 0.1% of the global population.
By the time we are done vaccinating the vulnerable then we should be a matter of weeks away from vaccinating everyone if we continue to ramp up and vaccinate everyone we can domestically. Finishing the job then being able to get everyone back to normal, and turning attention abroad to eradicating the bug will be far more productive than people still having to be restricted at home and doing a half-arsed job abroad.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
I know this is going to hurt (stretches the brain) , but imagine someone who is literally worse at her job than all those "London Politicians". SLAB would have kicked her out....
She has industriously proved this in a career of perfect failure, spanning decades.
Those vaccine numbers would upset her. And when she gets upset... well it's not good.
And Macron might start channeling Trump again...
Your last sentence misses point 2 below, that the vaccination rate is limited by:
1. Vaccine supply
2. Staff to give vaccines and manage sites
3. Vaccination sites
4. Willing vaccination recipients
In that order.
Virus spreads, cases and hospitalisations rise, people become scared, people stay at home (whether enforced or voluntary), cases fall, people stop being afraid, people go out, virus spreads etc
In both the UK and SA the new variant led to a scary rise in hospitalisations etc - thus meaning people who had become jaded and more confident about the whole thing were suddenly much more likely to take social distancing seriously.
This pandemic will end come what may - either with an unbearable body count (particularly in the west) or with vaccines. Thankfully we seem to be on the second route out now but our appalling death toll already sometimes makes me think we’re taking some sort of middle route. Ferguson et al said in their famous paper last March that reaching natural herd immunity would kill half a million. We may well get to a quarter of a million.
The virus will indeed mutate but immunity is not a zero sum game. COVID is not Captain Trips - having got it or been vaccinated or infected our bodies will always have enough memory of fighting it the first time to have a much more effective defence the second.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/pfizer-says-its-covid-vaccine-trial-for-kids-ages-12-to-15-is-fully-enrolled.html
Moderna are still working on enrolling theirs.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
https://twitter.com/kelvmackenzie/status/1316393332352876545?lang=en
I happen to agree that we should vaccinate UK residents first, then help Ireland (because: CTA, land border, and we owe them lots), then help the rest of the world, particularly 3rd world.
But I support this approach for purely selfish and political reasons - nothing to do with morality.
And who agrees with what you want politically?
Which is most of them tbf.
https://www.indiatoday.in/coronavirus-outbreak/story/india-to-produce-300-million-doses-of-sputnik-v-vaccine-as-russia-signs-more-deals-1750828-2020-12-18
https://www.politico.eu/article/ursula-von-der-leyen-biography-career-inconvenient-truth/
She is the classic of the fail-upwards genre.
I still wouldn't call him "a prime UK commentator" though. I wouldn't call myself a prime UK commentator and I believe in everything I believe in.
He's an old has-been pimping out car insurance.
It is like the start of the pandemic when we rejected mask testing because, unlike surgeons, the public might touch their faces which could be problematic if they needed to perform an emergency heart transplant in the middle of Sainsbury's.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
(Starmer has lost 6%. Ed Davey has lost 4%. Boris has lost 2%)
*not sure when he stopped
WW2 analogies are always helpful and it has been theorised that the rapid rotation of American generals between theatres where they were bogged down, rather than condeming them as failures to be consigned to outer darkness, was key to allied success.
Naturally people focus on the problem now and aren't taking into account that the EU portfolio will be fine, it's just been slower to start arriving, and that won't continue.
We are not there yet but if (i) vaccines are in limited supply and (ii) the UK has vaccinated sufficiently to control the virus and substantially reopen, it not IMMORAL (in fact it is quite the contrary) to argue that the priority should then be in countries where the virus is raging.
Furthermore this is the most rational approach for a global pandemic. It must be defeated globally otherwise it will be back to bite us with vicious imported mutations and we will be stuck in this twilight world for years.
The header is great but is playing to the gallery.
At least running it in the middle of the vaccine nationalist spasm shows how much resonance that had outside the PB herd. Thank goodness as we were still reeling from the body blows of blue envelopes and Hanoi Nic.