In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?
It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.
Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.
The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that
The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.
Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.
If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?
The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.
The UK was lucky? That's doing a huge disservice to those involved.
Either way, the UK has a well run vaccine programme. If the EU had secured those vaccines, it would still be a well run programme. No disservice at all.
If the EU had signed contracts with Pfizer that would have meant we'd have to wait months for those doses, I think we'd either have signed a contract with another mRNA vaccine candidate earlier (like Moderna) or spent money helping Pfizer set up manufacturing capacity in the UK.
The great success of the UK vaccine programme was not primarily signing contracts before anyone else, but spending money early enough to expand the supply of vaccines overall - crucially taking a risk before it was known that the vaccines were effective.
Testing through the roof, deaths to the floor (almost):
Soon it won't be a matter of who has had COVID, it will be a matter of who hasn't ever had a test.
Unless they find a mass of deaths to add to the figures, we should be averaging double-figure deaths next week. (I appreciate we already are on actual deaths occurring this week.)
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Another victim of cancel culture? Or is it racist patriarchy that did for it?
The Mash Report will not return for another series.
Maybe it is just because it wasn't my cup of tea, but The Mash Report seemed to be not much more than some lefties sarcastically reading out quotes from Conservative MP's whilst rolling their eyes - I cant help thinking none of them were the funny ones at school
That can be fertile comedic soil, though, what Conservative MPs say. They've got some rum characters in their ranks who come out with some quite choice remarks.
I think one of the things lost in some of these "comics" have become just so single track. Its Boris / Brexit booooooooooo, same as a lot of the US, Orange Man Bad has been 99% of their output for 4 years. It becomes predictable and dull after the 100th joke on the same topic. Part of the secret of comedy is saying the unexpected.
I really enjoyed lots of Mark Thomas shows, who is miles to the left of me politically, and certainly likes a good bash the Tories rant, but he is intermingles it will plenty of piss take of the nutters within his own band of people he associates with i.e. the Greenies, the SWP lot.
I've seen some of him. He's good but I struggled with the mix of comedy and polemic. The latter worked better for me. I found him more interesting than funny, is what I mean.
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Fair last point, sorry; directed not so much at you as at the poster who slandered me with 'gross hypocrisy', though.
Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.
The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that
The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.
Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.
If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?
The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.
I think it would have been perfectly possible to do an EU version of the elements of supply chain and distribution infrastructure that was done here across the EU-27, but one crucial mistake was that the EU-programme focus was on *buying* vaccines (that did not exist yet) like packs of bulk sausages from Aldi, whereas on this occasion the focus should have been on *creating* vaccines.
For me that is the biggest failure in this.
And because EC believe in a sort of moral superiority, it has been floudering and hitting out everywhere rather than realising that the "halo" is just a projection.
I disagree with you on this, however. The constraint with early vaccine supply everywhere is limited production capacity, not investment. The UK "bought up" early EU supplies ahead of the EU itself. That's why it had those 8 million extra doses in February that weren't available to the EU. The hundreds of millions of doses that will turn up in Q2 do come from investment - they are not produced within existing capacity - but by then hopefully there won't be any quantity constraints,
Gosh don't you talk a total load of bollocks, the UK invested in setting up manufacturers too it didn't just buy up vaccine supplies
Hmm.
The UK invested in production facilities through its contracts, hence the many millions of domestically produced doses coming on stream that I referred to. The EU has done the same.
However the 8 million doses supplied from the EU in February, against 11 million doses administered, would have gone to EU use if the EC had been more effective in securing its supply. I am OK with this, not least because I am hoping to get a vaccination soon.
I fail to see the outrage, unless you're an actual heifer.
I mean what adjectives do you use for someone who managed to lose a council seat to the Tories and then a parliamentary seat to the Tories that the Tories have never held before in a little over two years?
If only we had @ydoethur around. There's an Eric Heifer pun dying to be made.
I assume his absence is due to the return to school rather than anything else I have missed?
And what about @Sandpit I was pondering the other day? Not noticed him but then I've been on a bit less of late.
He is around. I have noticed him 'liking' a few posts today.
Including a couple of mine - so something might have happened to him.
Sandpit is generous with his likes and across the political spectrum so I doubt he has had a blow to the head nor have you worn him down and converted him into a lefty.
Indeed even I have had likes from you Kinablu doesn't mean I think I have made you a non leftie
Sometimes I use a "like" not to indicate agreement or approval or admiration but just to say ... "Watching you. Watching you quite closely."
You are weaponising a "like"?
How do people see who liked what posts?
Hover your cursor over a "liked" post "Like" and you can see who has liked it.
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Of course you do, because he agrees with your POV.
Flip it round, Owen Jones makes some interesting points but I bet you don't give him the same "balance argument".
Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.
I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.
Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.
Thinking out loud, if younger people have a stronger immune response, maybe they don't need as big a dose, so we could reduce the dose and vaccinate more people quicker?
Sod that. Give me the dose they tested and know works.
I'll swallow the increased delay between shots, but I'd want a damned good explanation for lowering the dosage.
The dosage is going to be a touch on the low side for me (And most other 6 ft+ men) if they've based it on an average person tbh.
Nice humblebrag there.
Hadn't thought of that. My wife is tiny, which could explain her reaction.
But do vaccines even work that way? The purpose is to expose your immune system to a dead copy of the virus, and the reaction is your immune system trying to work out how to get rid of it. Does your body mass really make a difference to that?
I doubt it, but I'm not a vaccine specialist.
Without running a lot of trials, it's hard to say precisely. AZN, of course, did run part of the trial (partly by accident) using a half dose, which still appeared to be effective. Similarly Moderna had very good results with subjects who received a lower dose - and some immunologists in the US have suggested running with it Given the approaching excess supply of vaccines, that's probably not going to happen.
As we've seen, medical authorities are very reluctant to diverge from the particular regime approved by regulators.
In general, there is a dose response curve for any given vaccine, but I think there's quite a wide margin for what is an effective dose.
Fun to see Lefties getting triggered by the canning of the MASH Report.
The only time "fun"and "MASH report" have appeared in the same sentence.
Do you agree that if this was a right-wing program you would be calling it cancel culture - along with others - but because it's a left-wing program it's just because it's shit?
We're pointing out the hypocrisy, as usual.
I agree BTW, it was shit.
I enjoyed it. If you are being satirical it is pretty hard to be a right wing comic (although possible). It is much easier to criticize from the left. I enjoyed Geoff Norcott on it. I think he struggles elsewhere. His skit on the LDs was excellent (I have to be able to take a joke).
Geoff Norcott always seems to say he's being cancelled/not represented yet he's been on every BBC comedy show I know.
Maybe the actual answer is that comedy that is funny lasts and comedy that isn't, doesn't?
No, it's because there's actually a culture war on.
It had 700,000 viewers only (and not many more on catch-up) had already had four series, and was in decline. And it is being replaced with a new comedy show.
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Of course you do, because he agrees with your POV.
Flip it round, Owen Jones makes some interesting points but I bet you don't give him the same "balance argument".
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Fair last point, sorry; directed not so much at you as at the poster who slandered me with 'gross hypocrisy', though.
In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?
It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.
Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.
The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that
The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.
Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.
If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?
The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.
The UK was lucky? That's doing a huge disservice to those involved.
Either way, the UK has a well run vaccine programme. If the EU had secured those vaccines, it would still be a well run programme. No disservice at all.
If the EU had signed contracts with Pfizer that would have meant we'd have to wait months for those doses, I think we'd either have signed a contract with another mRNA vaccine candidate earlier (like Moderna) or spent money helping Pfizer set up manufacturing capacity in the UK.
The great success of the UK vaccine programme was not primarily signing contracts before anyone else, but spending money early enough to expand the supply of vaccines overall - crucially taking a risk before it was known that the vaccines were effective.
Possibly. I think the EU actually has done OK on the core requirement, which you allude to, of contracting large number of doses from all the main western suppliers. They have also had rather a lot of muckups, which they inevitably seem to compound with their poor messaging. But it's noise really. By next month, EU member states should have plenty of vaccines to administer. It's up to the national health systems to get those doses into people's arms. Some will do well; others not so well; most will probably do OK.
A 50/50 ownership seems the best route. The British Museum's claim is that they actually have them. There's a very good argument that they have them because the Greeks had stuck them in a skip. However just because you leave your front door open doesn't entitle people to nick your stuff.
So 100 Tweets later does anyone here other that Scott and to an extent Richard Nabavi care about today's numbers?
But weeks ago when reports said lorry numbers hadn't declined in Jan you were happy to post that multiple times and say na na nah to Remainers.
Pot and kettle.
Eh? I did no such thing.
Lorry numbers declining in January was completely expected because of stockpiling in Q4 and people waiting to see how the border coped. The only thing I said na na nah about if any was the absence of the supposed border problems and tailbacks we'd been told ad nauseum would be there.
We were then told the border problems weren't there because lorry numbers were down. But then the report came that by February lorry numbers were back to normal. Still no border problems and tailbacks to go with the lorries.
Now flash forward and its back down to "there was a dip in January". Yeah, we all knew that. February will be more interesting, I expect there'll still be a dip but nothing like this.
Philip, you posted several times about how the lorry numbers were actually at 90% (when this was announced) As we now know the Govt has been criticized for this being misleading. You enjoyed this being against the expectations of the Remainers (which is fair enough). Remainers asked how many were empty and an ongoing debate ensued. I am not going to go back and find these posts but I'm pretty sure I am right but will retract if incorrect.
Not for January, no.
Lorry numbers were down considerably in January, it was the first half of February it was back more to those figures. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56086926
Well if I am quoting incorrectly I apologise.
Fair play to you kjh.
For what its worth I expect February's numbers perhaps to show a 20%-ish decline in trade. Still in lockdown, 10% down globally was the average for non-EU trade, then 10%ish for the remaining disruption in February.
Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.
He's quoting an opinion poll, and saying that's different to Twitter.
How does that make him a berk? Because he's pointing out facts you'd rather he didn't?
No, my point was that Goodwin said Twitter was a strange place, and he uses it himself to promote his views. I was actually replying to Rob's comment that Cameron was right about Twitter.
And my other point was that Goodwin used to be an interesting, respectable academic (of the right, as it happens). He isn't any more. Nigel Farage is a modern day Wat Tyler? Ffs.
If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.
Maybe he feels he's redressing the balance on Twitter?
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
Fair last point, sorry; directed not so much at you as at the poster who slandered me with 'gross hypocrisy', though.
With the axing of 'Mash Show' should there not be an attempt to reveal who at the BBC authorised its 4 series? One could justify giving an overtly biased show with terrible ratings 2 series but 4? Prior to a vote on foreign aid should it not be revealed how many MPs have a personal self-interest in the foreign aid budget being maintained?I have always suspected for political families govt foreign aid provides jobs for their families ad friends
Comments
The great success of the UK vaccine programme was not primarily signing contracts before anyone else, but spending money early enough to expand the supply of vaccines overall - crucially taking a risk before it was known that the vaccines were effective.
I think he's still an interesting academic and still makes some very good points. That doesn't mean I agree with absolutely everything he says.
There is no vilification going on, except in your own head. Replying to a comment of yours and disagreeing with it is not vilification.
The UK invested in production facilities through its contracts, hence the many millions of domestically produced doses coming on stream that I referred to. The EU has done the same.
However the 8 million doses supplied from the EU in February, against 11 million doses administered, would have gone to EU use if the EC had been more effective in securing its supply. I am OK with this, not least because I am hoping to get a vaccination soon.
Flip it round, Owen Jones makes some interesting points but I bet you don't give him the same "balance argument".
He also makes some bollocks comments.
https://twitter.com/Coronavirusgoo1/status/1370277237744930817?s=20
AZN, of course, did run part of the trial (partly by accident) using a half dose, which still appeared to be effective. Similarly Moderna had very good results with subjects who received a lower dose - and some immunologists in the US have suggested running with it
Given the approaching excess supply of vaccines, that's probably not going to happen.
As we've seen, medical authorities are very reluctant to diverge from the particular regime approved by regulators.
In general, there is a dose response curve for any given vaccine, but I think there's quite a wide margin for what is an effective dose.
https://twitter.com/chadbown/status/1370383119803686912?s=21
Well, blow me down with a feather.
For what its worth I expect February's numbers perhaps to show a 20%-ish decline in trade. Still in lockdown, 10% down globally was the average for non-EU trade, then 10%ish for the remaining disruption in February.
Lol - I vilified you after your express invitation to do so. Your exact words were as follows:
'If you and Bluestblue and others wish to vilify me for such innocuous remarks, be my guest.'
One could justify giving an overtly biased show with terrible ratings 2 series but 4?
Prior to a vote on foreign aid should it not be revealed how many MPs have a personal self-interest in the foreign aid budget being maintained?I have always suspected for political families govt foreign aid provides jobs for their families ad friends