Presumably each tunnel would be extremely expensive, so even if any of them make sense would you need tunnels to both Liverpool and Heysham? If so, maybe add another fron Anglesea?
Anglesea to Liverpool is already extremely well connected and has its own tunnel available. Would it not make sense for people from Anglesea to go via Liverpool?
If the project only makes "sense" as a political one designed to capture the headlines, without worrying about practicality or cost, then you might as well draw in as many spurs as possible.
There's clearly space for an additional one from IOM to Dublin but that appears to have been vetoed.
The whole story looks like a load of bollocks made up by journalists, actually.
(Presumably, the IoM have to be consulted before they are turned into a roundabout in the sea. Have they?)
My guess is that Boris is not too displeased by the made-up bollocks, either.
Covid vaccines have had a significant impact on the risk of serious illness in Scotland, an analysis shows.
The work led by Public Health Scotland found by the fourth week after the first dose hospitalisations were reduced by 85% and 94% for the Pfizer and AstraZeneca jabs respectively.
So how many people have Macron and Handelstwatt killed ?
I wouldn't read too much into AZN > Pfizer for now but it would certainly be amusing if AZN was the "premium" of the two in the end afterall given all the nonsense spread.
Game, set and match to humanity over the bastard bug though. We need to continue rollout and stick with the 1 dose for 12 week strategy. And the rest of the planet needs to catch up with us.
Quite clear either way though that the Irish put it best: The best vaccine for you is the one available today.
I was sent a jab text to turn up to get your jab 8.15am tomorrow ... 150 of us turned up and queued... on Sunday morning...we waited and waited.. surgery closed noone there....we went home.... It appears that the multi text that was sent out on Friday afternoon that was supposed to get us to turn up "tomorrow" at 8.15 ie on Sat am was not released until 10.10am on Sat ..of course we were meant to attend Sat am as the vaccine expired Sat 10.15. am. So an almighty cock up due the multi recipient text not going out immediately.. we don't think the vaccine was wasted,we think it went to key workers..
Is it common that multiple recipient texts get delayed on.this way...???
First I've heard of it. Hope they resolve your alternative vaccination soon. You shouldn't be exposed to risk any longer than have to, just because of an IT cock-up.
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Presumably each tunnel would be extremely expensive, so even if any of them make sense would you need tunnels to both Liverpool and Heysham? If so, maybe add another fron Anglesea?
The whole thing is obvs rubbish, as unfortunately Ireland is in the wrong place. Could this be a cunning plan to encourage Irish reunion?
Curiously though, as Ireland and chunks of west Scotland were once joined as a nation of sorts (pre Viking invasions of Ireland) a coherent country could comprise Scotland and Ireland, leaving E and W as sort of coherent too. Another thing that won't happen.
Presumably each tunnel would be extremely expensive, so even if any of them make sense would you need tunnels to both Liverpool and Heysham? If so, maybe add another fron Anglesea?
Anglesea to Liverpool is already extremely well connected and has its own tunnel available. Would it not make sense for people from Anglesea to go via Liverpool?
If the project only makes "sense" as a political one designed to capture the headlines, without worrying about practicality or cost, then you might as well draw in as many spurs as possible.
There's clearly space for an additional spur from IOM to Dublin but that appears to have been vetoed.
I use the Mersey tunnel quite regularly. Its already very well connected. Extra spurs would be redundant given the pre-existing tunnel network.
If the Irish wish to pay for an extra spur then we should of course leave that option open. Future proofing the roundabout if one were built to permit future spurs if they become more cost effective or demanded might make sense.
The Kingsway and Queensway tunnels under the Mersey weren't both built at once.
One of the points we should bear in mind (if these press reports are accurate) is that they show the PM really is making his own decisions, not those of SAGE. They want to keep schools shut for another couple of weeks.
Admittedly he may be listening to the advice of the DfE instead given they are absolutely desperate to reopen schools at once at any cost (except financial ones, which they are refusing to meet).
It could be a terrible blunder given how useless they all are, but it does show the idea that SAGE are lizard people who have captured the government is well wide of the mark.
Good.
Children have suffered enough blows to their education. If the NHS isn't at risk of collapse then schools should be open.
If the NHS isn't at risk of collapse then everywhere should be open. That was after all the reason for the lockdown in the first place: to allow the NHS to cope. If it can there is no justification for continuing with lockdowns.
But in any case I am not hopeful about today. Nor is Daughter. General disgust at Sunak talking to Gordon Ramsay , a multi-millionaire whose response during the first lockdown was to sack most of his staff - unlike people like my daughter who has kept on her staff despite furlough now not paying all their wages or NI or pension contributions and despite the £1k bonus for keeping staff on until February being removed.
Behave decently in this country and you get taken for a fool by the powers in charge.
I think that the best thing the government could do would be a permanent reduction in duty for the on-trade - alcohol sales in licensed premises. Problem drinkers and health resulted alcohol issues do not stem from pubs to any great extent, and the social good provided by pubs in particular is something that is undervalued.
Also drop VAT on food served hot or for consumption on the premises, now that we have powers over VAT.
Business rates on pubs can continue to be waived too, they raise comparatively little but are a huge fixed cost to smaller operators.
Both of those were done last year. It would be a good idea to continue with those policies.
Not sure you are right. I understood duty relief was on beer that had to be poured away due to enforced closure.
If they don't want the OXAZN vaccine, can we just do a part-exchange scheme? We get 2 Astrazenecas and they get one Pfizer. That way, at least one person can benefit from a (part) Teutonic vaccine that they are proud to have flowing through their veins, and two people can get the shot here.
If this data out of Scotland stands up to scrutiny then the government has got to be bold. Let's got on with unlockdown and push even harder with the vaccine programme. Get all adults fully vaccinated with two doses by the middle of June.
That's impossible I think, particularly given the 2nd AZ dose is more effacious 12 weeks from the first.
But the program should be rolling quicker, we ought to be on 500k jabs a day, every day !
We can use Moderna and Novavax with the standard 2-4 week gap for under 50s and with the expected supply we can do 5-7m per week of those for the under 50s meaning the programme can be complete within 10 weeks.
It also allows us to build a reserve of AZ which is being trialled for kids aged 6 and over so we can start that programme in June when it is expected to report back. That allows us to send kids to school in September with immunity.
Perhaps the roundabout under the Isle of Man would be a perfect location for the customs and standards checkpoints required to move stuff through these tunnels. The IoM government could make a killing in offering to run them as an impartial 3rd party. And have big duty free stores as well.
Even by 2005 the full scale of the Iraq catastrophe wasn't readily apparent.
Crab Air was dropping Paveway IVs (cost: £30,000 ea.) on Islamic State "encampments" in Iraq last week. It'll all be over by Christmas.
I'd like to have dinner with Frank Ledwidge. I'm sure he would expand greatly on his books.
I think I realised it wasn't going to end well the day the Aussie Sea King made an emergency landing on the docks at Basra. There was hours of debate at 1* level about whether it was politically worse to let the crew be killed or to take casualties trying to get them out. Eventually the Italian Aeronautica Militare security detachment at BSR said they'd go on their own which shamed our brass into action.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Is there any particular reason this is regarded as such a bad idea? I mean we have a tunnel from England to France...
I think it's a super idea myself, though this is the first time I've seen the Manx Interchange plan. Seems a bit of a weird one, as you have to go well out of your way to get from Scotland to NI and vice versa (though I assume it must still be quicker than the ferry).
Mr. Gin, the distances are bigger, the market is smaller, funds are tighter now than ever due to the pandemic, and a priority, if there' s money for infrastructure, should be roads and rail, especially in the north.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Thanks to Leavers, I no longer have a direct interest in the running of the EU and its member states. I will therefore concern myself with the many ineptitudes of the UK government.
Quite why Leavers remain so obsessed with the EU is remarkable. It’s almost as though they regret their decision at a primal level and are continuing to cast around for rationales to justify a decision made on fathomless hatred rather than cool logic.
A bravura post! It is alarming and quite shocking how much ill will and naked venom is shown to the EU on this site. I think your theory that at a primal level there is a wish to punish the EU for forcing us make such a regressive decision.
Sissy Spacek's mother in the film Carrie keeps coming to mind.
Moderate positions are available: Leavers and Remainers are interested in the EU because it is a powerful organisation that may or may not one day be a single state and already has a currency union, and 450,000,000 people on our doorstep and links 27 countries with whom we are friends, most of whom we are in a successful defence alliance with. Millions travel, live and work there. Very like Canada being interested in the USA.
Our millennia long relationship with Europe is going through a tough change, but in the eye of history relationships as a whole have rarely been better. Unusually the whole set of relationships is non threatening and non violent. That's new.
Presumably each tunnel would be extremely expensive, so even if any of them make sense would you need tunnels to both Liverpool and Heysham? If so, maybe add another fron Anglesea?
Anglesea to Liverpool is already extremely well connected and has its own tunnel available. Would it not make sense for people from Anglesea to go via Liverpool?
If the project only makes "sense" as a political one designed to capture the headlines, without worrying about practicality or cost, then you might as well draw in as many spurs as possible.
There's clearly space for an additional spur from IOM to Dublin but that appears to have been vetoed.
Only an idiot would have come up with that plan. Also, does Boris think the Isle of Man is part of the UK? They might have something to say about that in Douglas....
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
Is there any particular reason this is regarded as such a bad idea? I mean we have a tunnel from England to France...
I think it's a super idea myself, though this is the first time I've seen the Manx Interchange plan. Seems a bit of a weird one, as you have to go well out of your way to get from Scotland to NI and vice versa (though I assume it must still be quicker than the ferry).
The water between NI and Scotland is full of munitions. This route doesn't seem to be.
Though I'm curious why Stanraer for Scotland. I'd have thought a more Eastern point in Scotland would have made more sense given the IOM middle point - but I'm not too au fait with Scottish geography or if there's a good reason for it to be Stanraer.
Looking at a map of Scotland I'd have thought somewhere like Kirkcudbright on the way to Dumfries and still on the A75 would make more sense?
Perhaps the roundabout under the Isle of Man would be a perfect location for the customs and standards checkpoints required to move stuff through these tunnels. The IoM government could make a killing in offering to run them as an impartial 3rd party. And have big duty free stores as well.
Also no speed limit so it would be a great drift spot. *welds up diff*
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
Even by 2005 the full scale of the Iraq catastrophe wasn't readily apparent.
Crab Air was dropping Paveway IVs (cost: £30,000 ea.) on Islamic State "encampments" in Iraq last week. It'll all be over by Christmas.
I'd like to have dinner with Frank Ledwidge. I'm sure he would expand greatly on his books.
I think I realised it wasn't going to end well the day the Aussie Sea King made an emergency landing on the docks at Basra. There was hours of debate at 1* level about whether it was politically worse to let the crew be killed or to take casualties trying to get them out. Eventually the Italian Aeronautica Militare security detachment at BSR said they'd go on their own which shamed our brass into action.
The one quote I liked from his books about Iraq and Afghan (I think they were him, could have been Fairweather or Elliott) was a USMC dude saying something like "If I hear another word from the Brits about Northern Fucking Ireland I'll shoot the lot of them..."
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
94% for one dose, or even anything like it, would be a complete and utter vindication of the 1 dose strategy.
We need to rush getting 1 dose to everyone as fast as humanly possible. The second dose for the extremely vulnerable still makes sense, but get at least 1 jab into everyones arms ASAP.
Second jab maybe should wait for a new variant booster anyway except for the most vulnerable.
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
You have to make allowances for how the media report these things also. They are statistically illiterate at the best of times.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
Perhaps the roundabout under the Isle of Man would be a perfect location for the customs and standards checkpoints required to move stuff through these tunnels. The IoM government could make a killing in offering to run them as an impartial 3rd party. And have big duty free stores as well.
Also no speed limit so it would be a great drift spot. *welds up diff*
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
94% for one dose, or even anything like it, would be a complete and utter vindication of the 1 dose strategy.
We need to rush getting 1 dose to everyone as fast as humanly possible. The second dose for the extremely vulnerable still makes sense, but get at least 1 jab into everyones arms ASAP.
Second jab maybe should wait for a new variant booster anyway except for the most vulnerable.
No, we need to do the booster jab to ensure long term protection. If people need a third one in September/October then that's what we should do rather than delay second doses.
The current vaccine programme is fine, I think we can finish it a couple of months earlier though.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
If that were the case, they would have had scientific papers to back their comments, rather than simply political reasons.
If this data out of Scotland stands up to scrutiny then the government has got to be bold. Let's got on with unlockdown and push even harder with the vaccine programme. Get all adults fully vaccinated with two doses by the middle of June.
That's impossible I think, particularly given the 2nd AZ dose is more effacious 12 weeks from the first.
But the program should be rolling quicker, we ought to be on 500k jabs a day, every day !
I do wonder at the slowdown in jabs. Did AZ have to quietly divert UK production to Europe to avoid the EU cutting off Pfizer shipments to the UK?
However, if we are going to be bold and go for it, I'd like to see an acceleration of Novavax production and a mixing of doses. AZs poor performance against the SA strain is of concern and a combination of AZ and then Pfizer might be the way to avoid problems in summer.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
Demand reduction. That's all it ever was, especially given that the EU regulator gave it full authorisation for all ages. Everything after that has been politicking.
On-topic re who runs the show: Michael Gove is the dog who has not barked on this thread.
Off-topic re lockdown: iirc it is due to expire soon so this afternoon's announcement might need to get through parliament. Tbh I am not sure about this. It might explain the number of kites being flown last week.
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
I can't imagine a study, no matter how large, that had *no* error bars in the data.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
All they needed to do was watch the Bitesize segment on the Beeb where it was pointed out all the trials weren't the same, but they were all found to be effective. One interesting vaccine is Sinopharm which may well have the most similar response against all variants as it is based off of complete dead virus. It seems to be doing fine with real world ex China where it is being used (Bahrain iirc) Dr John Campbell seems happy with it.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
QTWAIN.
The way they spun on a sixpence from desperately trying to get the doses ASAP, sending inspectors in raiding the facility producing it looking for wrong doing and invoking Article 16 threatening NI and the UK ... To less than a week later casting doubt about the vaccine with no new evidence behind why they were doing so was absolutely inexcusable. Surely you can see that too?
The whole thing screamed "well I never wanted your crappy vaccine anyway" to move on from the diplomatic catastrophe of days earlier.
I`m having a to-and-fro with a friend about the percentage of population that travel abroad at least once in a typical year. He reckons over 60%. I think that`s absurd and reckon less than 30%. Anyone know the answer?
60% is far too high in my opinion. 30% sounds more likely, although I would probably have guessed around 20 to 25%. Lots of people would have made multiple trips of course. There are some years recently where I havent made a foreign trip at all, and I think I probably travel abroad more often than the average person. With respect to your friend, he sounds like someone who lives in a bubble which includes people who are travelling abroad a lot more frequently than average.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
94% for one dose, or even anything like it, would be a complete and utter vindication of the 1 dose strategy.
We need to rush getting 1 dose to everyone as fast as humanly possible. The second dose for the extremely vulnerable still makes sense, but get at least 1 jab into everyones arms ASAP.
Second jab maybe should wait for a new variant booster anyway except for the most vulnerable.
No, we need to do the booster jab to ensure long term protection. If people need a third one in September/October then that's what we should do rather than delay second doses.
The current vaccine programme is fine, I think we can finish it a couple of months earlier though.
Yes people need a booster jab, but besides the most vulnerable I'm saying shouldn't the booster jab come after everyone has a first jab?
I thought we could have new variant jabs ready in a couple of months? So they could be the boosters for anyone not yet boosted?
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
No. Have you seen any?
There's a world of difference between saying "we don't have Phase III trial data on over-65s" and its "ineffective in over-65s"
In this whole Euro-mess the Irish doctor's association summed it up best: "The best vaccine you can have is the one you can have now".
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
All they needed to do was watch the Bitesize segment on the Beeb where it was pointed out all the trials weren't the same, but they were all found to be effective. One interesting vaccine is Sinopharm which may well have the most similar response against all variants as it is based off of complete dead virus. It seems to be doing fine with real world ex China where it is being used (Bahrain iirc) Dr John Campbell seems happy with it.
UAE have used a couple of million of the Sinopharm, and did a local trial last year. Looks effective so far, on a par with the similar AZ.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
The Scottish study looks like huge news. Does anyone have a link to the report itself? Or is it under Scottish Government embargo for now?
I`m having a to-and-fro with a friend about the percentage of population that travel abroad at least once in a typical year. He reckons over 60%. I think that`s absurd and reckon less than 30%. Anyone know the answer?
60% is far too high in my opinion. 30% sounds more likely, although I would probably have guessed around 20 to 25%. Lots of people would have made multiple trips of course. There are some years recently where I havent made a foreign trip at all, and I think I probably travel abroad more often than the average person. With respect to your friend, he sounds like someone who lives in a bubble which includes people who are travelling abroad a lot more frequently than average.
Seems to me that an awful lot of people are in similar bubbles. Which is why the plight of the multitudes cooped up in small houses with children and money worries is being so overlooked by the chattering classes.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
No. Have you seen any?
There's a world of difference between saying "we don't have data on over-65s" and its "ineffective in over-65s"
In this whole Euro-mess the Irish doctor's association summed it up best: "The best vaccine you can have is the one you can have now".
Well enough people on here have made it clear what they think the reason is. I haven't looked at it closely. My point being I find it strange that they should have behaved as they did for the reasons being put forward here. But if people say it is because they wanted to cover up their own inadequacies until I do some further digging I will take it as a placeholder that that's what they did.
Is there any particular reason this is regarded as such a bad idea? I mean we have a tunnel from England to France...
I think it's a super idea myself, though this is the first time I've seen the Manx Interchange plan. Seems a bit of a weird one, as you have to go well out of your way to get from Scotland to NI and vice versa (though I assume it must still be quicker than the ferry).
The water between NI and Scotland is full of munitions. This route doesn't seem to be.
Though I'm curious why Stanraer for Scotland. I'd have thought a more Eastern point in Scotland would have made more sense given the IOM middle point - but I'm not too au fait with Scottish geography or if there's a good reason for it to be Stanraer.
Looking at a map of Scotland I'd have thought somewhere like Kirkcudbright on the way to Dumfries and still on the A75 would make more sense?
There are muntions to the NW of the IoM. Luce Bay on the "Stranraer Route" was a military practice range for years. The routes going east to England go through the oil and gas fields...
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
There's a lot the EU and European nations got wrong. Some of it fog of war, some of it making different judgements because their social controls were generally working better than the UK's. Some of it serious errors that people should (but won't) be held accountable for.
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
All that pseudo-science.... As Macron would say.
What incredible news though for the world. A single cheap jab and in 4 weeks your chances of dying from this incredibly low.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
94% for one dose, or even anything like it, would be a complete and utter vindication of the 1 dose strategy.
We need to rush getting 1 dose to everyone as fast as humanly possible. The second dose for the extremely vulnerable still makes sense, but get at least 1 jab into everyones arms ASAP.
Second jab maybe should wait for a new variant booster anyway except for the most vulnerable.
No, we need to do the booster jab to ensure long term protection. If people need a third one in September/October then that's what we should do rather than delay second doses.
The current vaccine programme is fine, I think we can finish it a couple of months earlier though.
Yes people need a booster jab, but besides the most vulnerable I'm saying shouldn't the booster jab come after everyone has a first jab?
No, there's some small amount of evidence that suggests efficacy starts to drop off after week 12/13 for AZ recipients and the booster jab not only gets overall efficacy up to ~85% but it provides a good level of long term immunity against variants via t-cells.
We have got Moderna and Novavax coming in April, those are the vaccines under 50s will get and we can do those with the standard 4 week gap. We'd need to do 6m of those vaccines per week for 8 weeks to get all adults under 50 jabbed twice. With Moderna and Novavax we should have the means to do that.
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
I can't imagine a study, no matter how large, that had *no* error bars in the data.
Yep, but "up to" is just wrong either way. If it's the point estimate then "up to" is no more correct than "down to". It implies the point estimate is the upper limit, which it isn't, it's just the point estimate. I don't really have a problem with the lay press just using the point estimate - 80% effective (or whatever) or using a range (70-90% effective, for example). But if its 80% (95%CI 70-90%) then it's not "up to 80% effective" it is, at best estimate, "80% effective or 70-90% effective).
I`m having a to-and-fro with a friend about the percentage of population that travel abroad at least once in a typical year. He reckons over 60%. I think that`s absurd and reckon less than 30%. Anyone know the answer?
60% is far too high in my opinion. 30% sounds more likely, although I would probably have guessed around 20 to 25%. Lots of people would have made multiple trips of course. There are some years recently where I havent made a foreign trip at all, and I think I probably travel abroad more often than the average person. With respect to your friend, he sounds like someone who lives in a bubble which includes people who are travelling abroad a lot more frequently than average.
Seems to me that an awful lot of people are in similar bubbles. Which is why the plight of the multitudes cooped up in small houses with children and money worries is being so overlooked by the chattering classes.
The polls show that the multitudes are still more on less on board with the government's strategy, despite their plight.
Perhaps the roundabout under the Isle of Man would be a perfect location for the customs and standards checkpoints required to move stuff through these tunnels. The IoM government could make a killing in offering to run them as an impartial 3rd party. And have big duty free stores as well.
Also no speed limit so it would be a great drift spot. *welds up diff*
The 997 and most of the 991 Cup cars have motorsport VINs which means you can't register them even if you wanted to. They are also a complete pain the dick to take outside the UK now as you need a carnet.
The 991.2 Benelux Cup cars (like mine) have normal VINs so in theory you can register them. In practice they would be a horrible road car (solid bushings, etc.) and difficult to get through an MoT even for an accomplished and confident briber like me. People have successfully got them road registered in Czechia.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
There's a lot the EU and European nations got wrong. Some of it fog of war, some of it making different judgements because their social controls were generally working better than the UK's. Some of it serious errors that people should (but won't) be held accountable for.
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
If AZ did such "an absurdly bad job" then why were they literally days earlier kicking up such a stink trying to get more AZ doses by any means necessary?
It was only after that action failed that this alternate idea that it was bad came up - and crucially there seems to have been no new scientific data or evidence that came up in that intervening period.
So how does that make any sense at all? Had it not been for the fact they were days earlier so desperate to get the vaccine, threatening export bans etc then it could be justified to say that the data was an issue, but the data wasn't an issue until the export ban idea failed miserably. Only then did the preexisting data become bad within a matter of days.
Its farcical to suggest otherwise. Nothing changed in the days inbetween the two wildly and extremely different ways of lashing out.
I hate using medical or mental health terms but the entire behaviour was quite literally manic depressive.
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
I can't imagine a study, no matter how large, that had *no* error bars in the data.
"You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling"
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
No. Have you seen any?
There's a world of difference between saying "we don't have data on over-65s" and its "ineffective in over-65s"
In this whole Euro-mess the Irish doctor's association summed it up best: "The best vaccine you can have is the one you can have now".
Well enough people on here have made it clear what they think the reason is. I haven't looked at it closely. My point being I find it strange that they should have behaved as they did for the reasons being put forward here. But if people say it is because they wanted to cover up their own inadequacies until I do some further digging I will take it as a placeholder that that's what they did.
EU politicians and their media mouthpieces were actively denigrating it *after* the EMA gave it full emergency authorisation for all ages. Their own regulator said it was good to go for everyone and yet they still piled on. This whole thing has been a disaster for the people of Europe who have been let down by their politicians weaponising their regulators to suppress demand.
I`m having a to-and-fro with a friend about the percentage of population that travel abroad at least once in a typical year. He reckons over 60%. I think that`s absurd and reckon less than 30%. Anyone know the answer?
60% is far too high in my opinion. 30% sounds more likely, although I would probably have guessed around 20 to 25%. Lots of people would have made multiple trips of course. There are some years recently where I havent made a foreign trip at all, and I think I probably travel abroad more often than the average person. With respect to your friend, he sounds like someone who lives in a bubble which includes people who are travelling abroad a lot more frequently than average.
Seems to me that an awful lot of people are in similar bubbles. Which is why the plight of the multitudes cooped up in small houses with children and money worries is being so overlooked by the chattering classes.
Or the bubbles we see frequently on the internet of people who never visit pubs, don’t know anyone who works in one, and have zero knowledge about the way the hospitality industry operates that lobby for the continued closure of pubs.
I`m having a to-and-fro with a friend about the percentage of population that travel abroad at least once in a typical year. He reckons over 60%. I think that`s absurd and reckon less than 30%. Anyone know the answer?
60% is far too high in my opinion. 30% sounds more likely, although I would probably have guessed around 20 to 25%. Lots of people would have made multiple trips of course. There are some years recently where I havent made a foreign trip at all, and I think I probably travel abroad more often than the average person. With respect to your friend, he sounds like someone who lives in a bubble which includes people who are travelling abroad a lot more frequently than average.
Seems to me that an awful lot of people are in similar bubbles. Which is why the plight of the multitudes cooped up in small houses with children and money worries is being so overlooked by the chattering classes.
Or the bubbles we see frequently on the internet of people who never visit pubs, don’t know anyone who works in one, and have zero knowledge about the way the hospitality industry operates that lobby for the continued closure of pubs.
Funny old world.
There are an extraordinary number of people who never go to a pub; often they like a drink but they wouldn't even think of going to a pub.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
I agree, although they will simply say there wasnt enough evidence at the time to authorise it. Thats technically true. The point is an emergency situation you have to take risks that you wouldnt normally take because the alternative may be worse.
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
There's a lot the EU and European nations got wrong. Some of it fog of war, some of it making different judgements because their social controls were generally working better than the UK's. Some of it serious errors that people should (but won't) be held accountable for.
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
"Absurdly bad" citation please. The trial was messy, but to characterise it as absurdly bad is ridiculous. It got authorisation from the MHRA, EMA and WHO for all ages and the FDA is likely to give it full authorisation as well. European politicians and their surrogates have made huge errors with it and now the people will pay the price.
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
No. Have you seen any?
There's a world of difference between saying "we don't have Phase III trial data on over-65s" and its "ineffective in over-65s"
In this whole Euro-mess the Irish doctor's association summed it up best: "The best vaccine you can have is the one you can have now".
Although the Irish are not allowing AZ for over 70s.
Surely it is the friends and family of the dead who should be bitter. That you can utterly dismiss their lives and their loss for political point scoring should be an outrage, but little is these days.
The abhorrent political points scoring is coming from both sides and is frankly unnecessary
The world is in a pandemic which is far from over and neither sadly is a rising worldwide death toll
If you're happy to score points on account of the vaccines success, then you can hardly object if the other side of the coin is examined.
The disease is nature.
The vaccine is humanity.
Be pissed off with nature of you want but I'm not sure what good it does.
You sound like one of those NRA nutters in the US after a school has just been zapped
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
To be blunt, their lies will kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of people.
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
I assume it’s because lots of people see fashion shopping as a leisure activity which will increase contact numbers for ‘frivolous’ reasons Whether that should matter or not, dunno. As you say it can’t be notably more risky.
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
Surely it is the friends and family of the dead who should be bitter. That you can utterly dismiss their lives and their loss for political point scoring should be an outrage, but little is these days.
The abhorrent political points scoring is coming from both sides and is frankly unnecessary
The world is in a pandemic which is far from over and neither sadly is a rising worldwide death toll
If you're happy to score points on account of the vaccines success, then you can hardly object if the other side of the coin is examined.
The disease is nature.
The vaccine is humanity.
Be pissed off with nature of you want but I'm not sure what good it does.
You sound like one of those NRA nutters in the US
Nah you are.
I'm saying the virus (like a gun) kills people.
You're the one claiming guns don't kill people, the government does.
If there's anything in that, other than noise, I wonder whether people are waiting three weeks after vaccination and then thinking 'party time!' That could give a change in hazard ratios for infection a week or two later.
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
To be blunt, their lies will kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of people.
And increase the risk of new mutant bastard bugs.
We should say no overseas holidays until they get vaccinations done and numbers under control. Open up this country and make it abundantly clear the reason we're open for business but foreign holidays aren't safe is because of their failures.
Even if its not legally forbidden just keep it against advice (with the consequences that has for insurance policies, cancellations etc).
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
Nationalised AZ/Oxford vaccine versus free market loving Pfizer.
AZ / Oxford running their program like it was some sort of PhD study, whereas Pfizer ruthlessly focused on the bottom line of getting trial approval and manufacturing as much of the vaccine as quickly as possible...
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
To be blunt, their lies will kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of people.
Yes, the level of denial from our EUphiles over this is as bad as some of the ardent government supporters denying that proper border quarantine would have prevented a second wave.
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
I assume it’s because lots of people see fashion shopping as a leisure activity which will increase contact numbers for ‘frivolous’ reasons Whether that should matter or not, dunno. As you say it can’t be notably more risky.
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
My girlfriend got told off in House of Fraser for trying on a jumper over her t-shirt, prior to Lockdown 2. Apparently only jackets were allowed to be tried on????? Mental.
I told her Mike Ashley didn't deserve her money anyway.
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
I assume it’s because lots of people see fashion shopping as a leisure activity which will increase contact numbers for ‘frivolous’ reasons Whether that should matter or not, dunno. As you say it can’t be notably more risky.
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
My girlfriend got told off in House of Fraser for trying on a jumper over her t-shirt, prior to Lockdown 2. Apparently only jackets were allowed to be tried on????? Mental.
I told her Mike Ashley didn't deserve her money anyway.
I mean who makes these kinds of micromanaging decisions? Is there some law or guideline that has set out which items of clothing can or can't be tried on in shops. The idea is completely ridiculous and I can't wait for this whole period to be consigned to the dustbin of history.
"People in Germany and France are refusing to take the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine after their leaders warned about its efficacy.
Only 150,000 out of 1.5million doses of the jab had been used in Germany on Friday, with many deliberately skipping appointments after learning they would receive the Oxford vaccine.
Politicians across Europe including Emmanuel Macron stoked fears the vaccine is 'quasi ineffective' among people aged over 65, despite minimal data to support this and many health authorities approving its use."
Hmm, the media seem to be getting a bit ahead of the actualité in reporting the Scottish vaccine-study figures. The 94% AZ figure applies only to days 28 to 34; there's no data on whether protection falls off after that. For Pfizer, the reported 85% also applies to days 28 to 34 but seems to fall off after that. In all cases, though, the error bars are quite big. These are encouraging but very preliminary results and are not sufficient to say one vaccine is better than the other; they also tend to suggest that the second Pfizer dose within 28 days is needed for good protection, although again more data needed.
What I think one can say with confidence from the study is that the AZ jab is very good, and we already know from Israel that the Pfizer one also is (albeit with two doses).
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
There's a lot the EU and European nations got wrong. Some of it fog of war, some of it making different judgements because their social controls were generally working better than the UK's. Some of it serious errors that people should (but won't) be held accountable for.
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
"Absurdly bad" citation please. The trial was messy, but to characterise it as absurdly bad is ridiculous. It got authorisation from the MHRA, EMA and WHO for all ages and the FDA is likely to give it full authorisation as well. European politicians and their surrogates have made huge errors with it and now the people will pay the price.
They were asked "how well does this work with over 65's", weren't they? Their answer was "somewhere between perfectly and it makes people sicker". The range bars were huge, because their study was hopelessly underpowered.
From the Pascal Soriot interview; “The issue with the elderly data is not so much whether it works or not. It´s that we have today a limited amount of data in the older population...There's no enough vaccines for everybody. So if they want to use another vaccine for older people and our vaccine for younger people, what´s the problem? It’s not a problem."
That's what several countries are doing. Use AZ for (f'example) health workers, other vaccines (where the data are more reliable) with the elderly. It's only a problem when people project other issues onto the vaccine one.
And before anyone, anyone, dares to point fingers at the tragic cost in lives, remember the story so far.
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
I assume it’s because lots of people see fashion shopping as a leisure activity which will increase contact numbers for ‘frivolous’ reasons Whether that should matter or not, dunno. As you say it can’t be notably more risky.
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
My girlfriend got told off in House of Fraser for trying on a jumper over her t-shirt, prior to Lockdown 2. Apparently only jackets were allowed to be tried on????? Mental.
I told her Mike Ashley didn't deserve her money anyway.
Lol!
My missus pioneered a system whereby she’d buy the clothes, go around the corner to John Lewis and try them on in the ladies, where apparently they have “good full length mirrors” and - if they didn’t fit - take them back to the shop for a refund there and then. A decent life hack!
Yes, the level of denial from our EUphiles over this is as bad as some of the ardent government supporters denying that proper border quarantine would have prevented a second wave.
It's not just that they have undermined what now seems to be a highly effective vaccine, but it's also the cheapest, and easiest to use vaccine so far, and it's intended to be produced in billions of doses for countries all over the world. A whole load of idiots should lose their jobs for what they have done.
Perhaps the roundabout under the Isle of Man would be a perfect location for the customs and standards checkpoints required to move stuff through these tunnels. The IoM government could make a killing in offering to run them as an impartial 3rd party. And have big duty free stores as well.
Also no speed limit so it would be a great drift spot. *welds up diff*
The 997 and most of the 991 Cup cars have motorsport VINs which means you can't register them even if you wanted to. They are also a complete pain the dick to take outside the UK now as you need a carnet.
The 991.2 Benelux Cup cars (like mine) have normal VINs so in theory you can register them. In practice they would be a horrible road car (solid bushings, etc.) and difficult to get through an MoT even for an accomplished and confident briber like me. People have successfully got them road registered in Czechia.
So long as it has something stamped in the windscreen, and export paperwork from the origin country, I reckon I could get plates for it out here. They have full light clusters and a speedo, would just need some tyres and be good to go!
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
I can't imagine a study, no matter how large, that had *no* error bars in the data.
Yep, but "up to" is just wrong either way. If it's the point estimate then "up to" is no more correct than "down to". It implies the point estimate is the upper limit, which it isn't, it's just the point estimate. I don't really have a problem with the lay press just using the point estimate - 80% effective (or whatever) or using a range (70-90% effective, for example). But if its 80% (95%CI 70-90%) then it's not "up to 80% effective" it is, at best estimate, "80% effective or 70-90% effective).
I still don't really understand the logic of keeping "non-essential" retail closed. Like why is it less risky to go down a cramped Tesco aisle compared to a cramped H&M aisle? Both sell clothes, just one also sells food.
I assume it’s because lots of people see fashion shopping as a leisure activity which will increase contact numbers for ‘frivolous’ reasons Whether that should matter or not, dunno. As you say it can’t be notably more risky.
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
My girlfriend got told off in House of Fraser for trying on a jumper over her t-shirt, prior to Lockdown 2. Apparently only jackets were allowed to be tried on????? Mental.
I told her Mike Ashley didn't deserve her money anyway.
I mean who makes these kinds of micromanaging decisions? Is there some law or guideline that has set out which items of clothing can or can't be tried on in shops. The idea is completely ridiculous and I can't wait for this whole period to be consigned to the dustbin of history.
Hmm, the media seem to be getting a bit ahead of the actualité in reporting the Scottish vaccine-study figures. The 94% AZ figure applies only to days 28 to 34; there's no data on whether protection falls off after that. For Pfizer, the reported 85% also applies to days 28 to 34 but seems to fall off after that. In all cases, though, the error bars are quite big. These are encouraging but very preliminary results and are not sufficient to say one vaccine is better than the other; they also tend to suggest that the second Pfizer dose within 28 days is needed for good protection, although again more data needed.
What I think one can say with confidence from the study is that the AZ jab is very good, and we already know for Israel that the Pfizer one also is (albeit with two doses).
Given that the data was apparently collected between 8 December and 15 February, there is a rather simple explanation for why we don't have data for longer periods....
If that 94% preprint figure turns out to be anywhere close to accurate for the AZ vaccine there's going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces in Europe. Worse still is that they'll have an amazing vaccine that will prevent people from dying that they've completely undermined it so 30m doses will just sit in fridges across Europe while the rest of the world cries out for more vaccine doses.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
To be blunt, their lies will kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of people.
And increase the risk of new mutant bastard bugs.
We should say no overseas holidays until they get vaccinations done and numbers under control. Open up this country and make it abundantly clear the reason we're open for business but foreign holidays aren't safe is because of their failures.
Even if its not legally forbidden just keep it against advice (with the consequences that has for insurance policies, cancellations etc).
It must be so temping for the government to make a statement to the effect of people can go to other places, when those other places have also vaccinated everyone and are free from the disease.
They’ve been very good at biting their tongue on the whole EU vaccine rollout issue.
Yes, the level of denial from our EUphiles over this is as bad as some of the ardent government supporters denying that proper border quarantine would have prevented a second wave.
It's not just that they have undermined what now seems to be a highly effective vaccine, but it's also the cheapest, and easiest to use vaccine so far, and it's intended to be produced in billions of doses for countries all over the world. A whole load of idiots should lose their jobs for what they have done.
Well, they've got few vaccines, little take-up, and zero accountability, but at least the EU is well-supplied with this:
They state in the story that there is a pre-print paper on SSRN - can't seem to find it...
I hope those "up to"s are not the upper 95% CI. Otherwise AZN can get higher than Pfizer by e.g. having a much smaller sample size. Like you, I'd love to see the pre-print (as discussed the other day, why can't they link to it or at least give enough info to easily find it?)
As part of the EAVE II project, which uses patient data to track the pandemic and the vaccine roll out in real time, researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Strathclyde, Aberdeen, Glasgow and St Andrew’s and Public Health Scotland (PHS) analysed a dataset covering the entire Scottish population of 5.4 million.
crosses fingers....
Still can't find the pre-print though (not that I've tried that hard). "Up to" always worries me, in any sense. If they're using the point estimates, it shouldn't be "up to" either. Hmm, have to just wait and see for the preprint, I guess.
I can't imagine a study, no matter how large, that had *no* error bars in the data.
Yep, but "up to" is just wrong either way. If it's the point estimate then "up to" is no more correct than "down to". It implies the point estimate is the upper limit, which it isn't, it's just the point estimate. I don't really have a problem with the lay press just using the point estimate - 80% effective (or whatever) or using a range (70-90% effective, for example). But if its 80% (95%CI 70-90%) then it's not "up to 80% effective" it is, at best estimate, "80% effective or 70-90% effective).
All that reminds me of Gordon Brown over the Global Economic Crisis.
Brown's failings were before the financial crisis.
Johnson wasn't even PM a year before this. Between vaccines and genomic sequencing he's ensured we are well placed to come out of it first though.
Hmmm, I’m not sure which claim is sillier the idea that he had no influence on policy before he became PM or the idea that he was personally involved in vaccines or genomic sequencing.
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to set up and pay for COGUK?
You think Boris had nothing to do with setting up and paying for the vaccine taskforce?
You think Boris had nothing to do with the decision to reject opposition advice about joining the EU scheme instead?
The Kumbaya boys are back! ....Felix....Sandpit.....
Given how many pbers regard the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands as excusable and something to be discreetly forgotten as quickly as possible, to the point of snarling viciously at anyone who has the effrontery to mention it, you’re not likely to find a balanced assessment of the government’s role from the site’s government supporters.
Ok, but do you have any evidence to the contrary from the electorate at large on this?
Because what we keep hearing from the LOTO's office is that voters are inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't like it when they're attacked over the pandemic.
What we’ve learned in the last year is that there is a substantial cohort of voters (well-represented on pb) for whom anything this government does, up to and including negligently killing tens of thousands, is excusable. Can you imagine how they would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had presided over the shambles we’ve seen this last year?
This is of course utterly contemptible, but there are betting implications to be drawn from this level of loyalty.
Alastair, I completely agree that the government's performance has been woeful.
But, if you think our government is responsible for killing tens of thousands, presumably you think the same (if not worse) of the leaders in Europe who have pro-actively destroyed the reputation of a vaccine to the point that the people don't want it. I mean, that is fucking special.
Our government ordered the NHS to send elderly patients back into care homes. A direct instruction - https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-care-homes-discharge/ Which directly killed tens of thousands. If the government wasn't responsible for the absolutely avoidable slaughter in care homes then who was?
I don't disagree. Perhaps there will be prosecutions when this is all over.
If you agree, why did you call out the idea that the government is responsible for killing tens of thousands? I don't care what they do in Europe, that's not our responsibility. Nor is it an either/or - BOTH things can be true.
As I keep pointing out, the roll-out of the vaccine has been a massive success. That in no way negates the general chaos and mass slaughter before it - we could have done things responsibly for a year and THEN had a massive success with vaccination. It isn't an either/or...
I was just curious as to what Alastair thought about other governments. What happened with care homes was bad, but one could argue the governments of the UK were faced with no good options.
Actively undermining a vaccine. Well, that's another level of badness.
Its whataboutery. Yes this is shit, but whatabout that? "What happened with care homes was bad". Bad = 20k dead who should still be alive. Its not bad, its bloody criminal. And you lot don't give a toss because Back Boris.
XXXX off you XXXX. I do care. I also care about intent. The governments of the UK did not mean to kill those people.
The governments of Europe are very much happy to kill their people to cover for their own incompetence.
Can you see the logic fail? You think it impossible that one govt would mean to kill its own population, but think it meanwhile entirely likely, certain even, that another govt would.
The Russians.
The Russians have claimed their death toll is minimal and the virus is undercontrol. Meanwhile their excess deaths are over a quarter of a million and counting by November alone. They supposedly have a great vaccine but are only giving it to VIPs and not their vulnerable population it seems.
Whether Putin sees the virus as a way of cleansing his demographics saving on pension support etc - or if he just has a callous indifference to whether the elderly peasants in his nation die so long as he's safe, its clear they're not trying to halt the spread in the same way we are.
Interesting. You are to date the only person who has given me information about this and if you are right then it is shocking. For all its deficits, are we really saying that the EU is acting in the same way? @tlg86 seems to think so.
Politicians in Europe, including President Macron in France, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine. This has undoubtedly contributed to people in Europe not wanting it. Are they as bad as Putin? Probably not, but they are certainly worse than our, still very incompetent, politicians.
Do you not think they had (their own/their scientific establishment's) valid reasons for casting doubt?
There's a lot the EU and European nations got wrong. Some of it fog of war, some of it making different judgements because their social controls were generally working better than the UK's. Some of it serious errors that people should (but won't) be held accountable for.
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
"Absurdly bad" citation please. The trial was messy, but to characterise it as absurdly bad is ridiculous. It got authorisation from the MHRA, EMA and WHO for all ages and the FDA is likely to give it full authorisation as well. European politicians and their surrogates have made huge errors with it and now the people will pay the price.
They were asked "how well does this work with over 65's", weren't they? Their answer was "somewhere between perfectly and it makes people sicker". The range bars were huge, because their study was hopelessly underpowered.
From the Pascal Soriot interview; “The issue with the elderly data is not so much whether it works or not. It´s that we have today a limited amount of data in the older population...There's no enough vaccines for everybody. So if they want to use another vaccine for older people and our vaccine for younger people, what´s the problem? It’s not a problem."
That's what several countries are doing. Use AZ for (f'example) health workers, other vaccines (where the data are more reliable) with the elderly. It's only a problem when people project other issues onto the vaccine one.
And before anyone, anyone, dares to point fingers at the tragic cost in lives, remember the story so far.
And yet the MHRA, EMA and WHO approved it for all ages. So that's just bullshit really isn't it. The EU's own regulator has given it full approval and it's the politicians that have undermined it. The politicians you seem to be defending because your love of the EU has blinded you to just how many are going to die because of their words and actions that have led to people rejecting a vaccine that is highly effective.
Hopefully we are very soon (today?) going to get the first vaccine-effectiveness results from England, which will have much bigger sample sizes than the Scottish study.
Comments
(Presumably, the IoM have to be consulted before they are turned into a roundabout in the sea. Have they?)
My guess is that Boris is not too displeased by the made-up bollocks, either.
It is a loony idea, but at least it is an idea.
Sir Cautious Starmer doesn't even get ideas
Game, set and match to humanity over the bastard bug though. We need to continue rollout and stick with the 1 dose for 12 week strategy. And the rest of the planet needs to catch up with us.
Quite clear either way though that the Irish put it best: The best vaccine for you is the one available today.
crosses fingers....
Curiously though, as Ireland and chunks of west Scotland were once joined as a nation of sorts (pre Viking invasions of Ireland) a coherent country could comprise Scotland and Ireland, leaving E and W as sort of coherent too. Another thing that won't happen.
If the Irish wish to pay for an extra spur then we should of course leave that option open. Future proofing the roundabout if one were built to permit future spurs if they become more cost effective or demanded might make sense.
The Kingsway and Queensway tunnels under the Mersey weren't both built at once.
The point I am making is made better here
https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2020/12/hospitality-and-pub-trade-bodies-call-for-alcohol-duty-reform/
It also allows us to build a reserve of AZ which is being trialled for kids aged 6 and over so we can start that programme in June when it is expected to report back. That allows us to send kids to school in September with immunity.
Our millennia long relationship with Europe is going through a tough change, but in the eye of history relationships as a whole have rarely been better. Unusually the whole set of relationships is non threatening and non violent. That's new.
They've sacrificed people's lives to protect the job of Ursula and the other incompetents in the commission.
Though I'm curious why Stanraer for Scotland. I'd have thought a more Eastern point in Scotland would have made more sense given the IOM middle point - but I'm not too au fait with Scottish geography or if there's a good reason for it to be Stanraer.
Looking at a map of Scotland I'd have thought somewhere like Kirkcudbright on the way to Dumfries and still on the A75 would make more sense?
We need to rush getting 1 dose to everyone as fast as humanly possible. The second dose for the extremely vulnerable still makes sense, but get at least 1 jab into everyones arms ASAP.
Second jab maybe should wait for a new variant booster anyway except for the most vulnerable.
https://collectingcars.com/for-sale/2008-porsche-911-997-gt3-cup
The current vaccine programme is fine, I think we can finish it a couple of months earlier though.
I do wonder at the slowdown in jabs. Did AZ have to quietly divert UK production to Europe to avoid the EU cutting off Pfizer shipments to the UK?
However, if we are going to be bold and go for it, I'd like to see an acceleration of Novavax production and a mixing of doses. AZs poor performance against the SA strain is of concern and a combination of AZ and then Pfizer might be the way to avoid problems in summer.
Off-topic re lockdown: iirc it is due to expire soon so this afternoon's announcement might need to get through parliament. Tbh I am not sure about this. It might explain the number of kites being flown last week.
One interesting vaccine is Sinopharm which may well have the most similar response against all variants as it is based off of complete dead virus. It seems to be doing fine with real world ex China where it is being used (Bahrain iirc) Dr John Campbell seems happy with it.
The way they spun on a sixpence from desperately trying to get the doses ASAP, sending inspectors in raiding the facility producing it looking for wrong doing and invoking Article 16 threatening NI and the UK ... To less than a week later casting doubt about the vaccine with no new evidence behind why they were doing so was absolutely inexcusable. Surely you can see that too?
The whole thing screamed "well I never wanted your crappy vaccine anyway" to move on from the diplomatic catastrophe of days earlier.
I thought we could have new variant jabs ready in a couple of months? So they could be the boosters for anyone not yet boosted?
There's a world of difference between saying "we don't have Phase III trial data on over-65s" and its "ineffective in over-65s"
In this whole Euro-mess the Irish doctor's association summed it up best: "The best vaccine you can have is the one you can have now".
But AZ did do an absurdly bad job of providing data to confirm the effectiveness of their vaccine. And Euroboffins saying "we need more certainty than this" was reasoned and responsible. Just wrong.
What incredible news though for the world. A single cheap jab and in 4 weeks your chances of dying from this incredibly low.
We have got Moderna and Novavax coming in April, those are the vaccines under 50s will get and we can do those with the standard 4 week gap. We'd need to do 6m of those vaccines per week for 8 weeks to get all adults under 50 jabbed twice. With Moderna and Novavax we should have the means to do that.
The 991.2 Benelux Cup cars (like mine) have normal VINs so in theory you can register them. In practice they would be a horrible road car (solid bushings, etc.) and difficult to get through an MoT even for an accomplished and confident briber like me. People have successfully got them road registered in Czechia.
It was only after that action failed that this alternate idea that it was bad came up - and crucially there seems to have been no new scientific data or evidence that came up in that intervening period.
So how does that make any sense at all? Had it not been for the fact they were days earlier so desperate to get the vaccine, threatening export bans etc then it could be justified to say that the data was an issue, but the data wasn't an issue until the export ban idea failed miserably. Only then did the preexisting data become bad within a matter of days.
Its farcical to suggest otherwise. Nothing changed in the days inbetween the two wildly and extremely different ways of lashing out.
I hate using medical or mental health terms but the entire behaviour was quite literally manic depressive.
Funny old world.
https://twitter.com/AIthemarAms/status/1363807868701523973?s=20
Mrs Anabobzina says they will have to let you try on clothes when the reopen. In her view there is simply no point to bricks and mortar shopping if she can’t try on the dress on-site.
I'm saying the virus (like a gun) kills people.
You're the one claiming guns don't kill people, the government does.
We should say no overseas holidays until they get vaccinations done and numbers under control. Open up this country and make it abundantly clear the reason we're open for business but foreign holidays aren't safe is because of their failures.
Even if its not legally forbidden just keep it against advice (with the consequences that has for insurance policies, cancellations etc).
Nationalised AZ/Oxford vaccine versus free market loving Pfizer.
AZ / Oxford running their program like it was some sort of PhD study, whereas Pfizer ruthlessly focused on the bottom line of getting trial approval and manufacturing as much of the vaccine as quickly as possible...
I told her Mike Ashley didn't deserve her money anyway.
"People in Germany and France are refusing to take the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine after their leaders warned about its efficacy.
Only 150,000 out of 1.5million doses of the jab had been used in Germany on Friday, with many deliberately skipping appointments after learning they would receive the Oxford vaccine.
Politicians across Europe including Emmanuel Macron stoked fears the vaccine is 'quasi ineffective' among people aged over 65, despite minimal data to support this and many health authorities approving its use."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9286231/Germany-France-pay-price-AstraZeneca-scaremongering-citizens-REFUSE-Oxford-jab.html
What I think one can say with confidence from the study is that the AZ jab is very good, and we already know from Israel that the Pfizer one also is (albeit with two doses).
Their answer was "somewhere between perfectly and it makes people sicker".
The range bars were huge, because their study was hopelessly underpowered.
From the Pascal Soriot interview;
“The issue with the elderly data is not so much whether it works or not. It´s that we have today a limited amount of data in the older population...There's no enough vaccines for everybody. So if they want to use another vaccine for older people and our vaccine for younger people, what´s the problem? It’s not a problem."
That's what several countries are doing. Use AZ for (f'example) health workers, other vaccines (where the data are more reliable) with the elderly. It's only a problem when people project other issues onto the vaccine one.
And before anyone, anyone, dares to point fingers at the tragic cost in lives, remember the story so far.
https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areas=eur&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&areasRegional=usaz&areasRegional=usca&areasRegional=usnd&areasRegional=ussd&cumulative=0&logScale=0&per100K=1&startDate=2020-09-01&values=deaths
My missus pioneered a system whereby she’d buy the clothes, go around the corner to John Lewis and try them on in the ladies, where apparently they have “good full length mirrors” and - if they didn’t fit - take them back to the shop for a refund there and then. A decent life hack!
The 95% CI for the 94% number is 73 to 99, and is based on two events.
They’ve been very good at biting their tongue on the whole EU vaccine rollout issue.
https://twitter.com/Real_Adam_B/status/1357806822304997385