Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

With the Cummings Commons Committee starting at 0930 – the former advisor Tweets a pic of pre-lockdo

2456

Comments

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279
    IanB2 said:

    Presumably if there is a question designed to bring the killer information onto the table, Hunt will be the one who has (been given) it.


    But, given that DC is on the other side of the table, who will have had the nous to write it?
    In DC's opinion, anyway!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986
    Sounds like the scientists were not expecting any vaccines to work (or at least for them not to be available within a year).
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 11,183

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I'm thinking less of tweaking the vaccines to deal with variants and more about developing a vaccine for bird flu, or SARS-Cov-3, or a swine flu with an IFR above 1%, etc.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    As he delivers his testimony, 75% of the public don't trust Dominic Cummings to tell the truth about how the government handled the pandemic. 55% don't trust Boris Johnson either, however...


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1397479385171701760?s=20
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279
    tlg86 said:

    Sounds like the scientists were not expecting any vaccines to work (or at least for them not to be available within a year).

    To be fair, that wasn't an unreasonable expectation. Both Biotech and Oxford/AZN did a first class job in getting useable products so quickly.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,467
    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Someone has taken the lid off of our tupperware box
    It's an unlicensed nuclear reactor. No planning permission, no environmental impact statements, no containment, no cooling system, no emergency cooling system, no waste disposal repository, no waste disposal plan...

    A complete cowboy job. Makes "Chernobyl look like picnic".
    And yet nobody has even been told to shut it down, let alone been held to account! Disgraceful.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279

    As he delivers his testimony, 75% of the public don't trust Dominic Cummings to tell the truth about how the government handled the pandemic. 55% don't trust Boris Johnson either, however...


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1397479385171701760?s=20

    Probably quite a big overlap, to be fair.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 32,260

    As he delivers his testimony, 75% of the public don't trust Dominic Cummings to tell the truth about how the government handled the pandemic. 55% don't trust Boris Johnson either, however...


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1397479385171701760?s=20

    You don’t have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun your companion.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,385

    Pulpstar said:

    The 'seal off the vulnerable and let it rip through the rest of the population plan'.

    In theory it could work BUT

    i) You need to identify who is vulnerable - it's broadly correlated with age and comorbifity but you'll get some outliers who it kills outside those groups.
    ii) You need a hard cutoff if you're assuming differential action between the groups. Someone just below the shielding cut-off may have a minutely differing risk to someone above but their prescribed course of action will be completely different.
    iii) People above the cutoff may well have interaction, even through no fault of their own with those below. e.g. Old people need to head into hospital for things other than Covid. People in the more vulnerable group will not hermetically seal themselves off forever.
    iv) Even if everyone followed it 100% you'd get a certain level of mortality in the lesser vulnerable group.
    v) Spread through the lesser vulnerable group might lead to more transmissible mutations. This means ultimately your lesser vulnerable group isn't large enough so you need to release people from the more vulnerable group to achieve herd immunity.
    vii) People in the spread group may well try and err... avoid the virus by lessening their contact levels.
    viii) The temptation/pressure to lock everyone down as the bodies hit the floor rack up will be immense.

    So you'd need perfectly defined groups; perfect spread behaviour amongst the spread group, perfect shielding behaviour amongst the shielding group, a big appetite for death...

    I think again it comes down to the infamous first academic paper that said vast majority will only suffer mild symptoms...which the author meant not need hospital treatment, not as was taken by many to mean everybody under 80 will just have a bad cold.

    It set the tone as a disease that only oldies were in danger.
    a tone which is much more accurate than the media panic spread when Bergamo doctors started announcing this was an indiscriminate killer
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    edited May 2021
    How much, if at all, do you trust the following to tell the truth about how the Government handled the coronavirus outbreak?

    OA (Con VI) Net Trust
    Johnson: -17 (+55)
    Cummings: -61 (-54)

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/iszcru07g6/TheTimes_Coronahandling_Cummings_Results_210520.pdf
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I'm thinking less of tweaking the vaccines to deal with variants and more about developing a vaccine for bird flu, or SARS-Cov-3, or a swine flu with an IFR above 1%, etc.
    Indeed. Getting the vaccination development timeline from ~5 to 10 years down to ~10 months was remarkable.

    But we should be examining how if possible for next time we could get a vaccine testing program down even further. Could we get it down to 6 months?

    Especially since the Moderna vaccine was apparently developed in just 2 days.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279
    edited May 2021

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
    Current BBC forecast for here is sunny periods and temperatures approaching 20degC.
    Even more sun for Dover.
    So the odds on snow have to be quite long.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    tlg86 said:

    Sounds like the scientists were not expecting any vaccines to work (or at least for them not to be available within a year).

    The previous record was over four years to get a vaccine to market. The vaccine trial efforts, led by U.K. and US governments, were absolutely unprecedented.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986
    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
    Current BBC forecast for here is sunny periods and temperatures approaching 20degC.
    Even more sun for Dover.
    So the odds on snow have to be quite long.
    And the forecast for the next fortnight is predicting, at long, long last, a lengthy period of dry and passably warm weather. As opposed to alleging that it will improve in about a weeks' time, and then finding after a week has passed that the prediction was wholly inaccurate.

    Alleluia! Perhaps we will get something resembling a Summer after all?
  • Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,446
    edited May 2021
    tlg86 said:

    Sounds like the scientists were not expecting any vaccines to work (or at least for them not to be available within a year).

    That was what drove the Swedish thinking, it will be at least several years before a vaccine...so what, you are going to just shut yourself away for 2-3 years and even then it might well not come.

    Obviously they have and actually with the variants it is even more transmissible and so yes you do have to
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,779

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Someone has taken the lid off of our tupperware box
    It's an unlicensed nuclear reactor. No planning permission, no environmental impact statements, no containment, no cooling system, no emergency cooling system, no waste disposal repository, no waste disposal plan...

    A complete cowboy job. Makes "Chernobyl look like picnic".
    Full of nasty UV emissions at the best of times. And it goes poot every now and then. Screws up Radio 4, not to mention a lot else.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Indeed!

    Not what I was expecting after the press briefings. Turns out the press have called it wrong again.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    And certainly not the impression Rigby is annoting on her side bar on Sky
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,296
    Fishing said:

    The only interesting thing on that whiteboard are the words, “Who do we not save?”

    I think it would be worse if they weren't there.

    To govern is to choose, and to choose in health matters is usually to decide whom to save and whom to let die.
    This is what NICE does in effect.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,942
    Nearly an hour into this. Has Cummings said anything like it might cause embarrassment.. Now if he admitted he had lied about his lockdown trip.. that might be a story...
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 8,609

    I feel DoCu is using this as a public pitch for future work.

    Burning his bridges with the streams of consciousness recently has probably destroyed any chance of that with any serious politician.

    Other than Gove who would trust him now?
    And vice versa?
    Maybe that doesn't matter.

    Dom is rich enough that he doesn't need to work, the life of an aristocratic gentleman-scholar might suit him well.

    That's what makes him dangerous.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,467

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
    Current BBC forecast for here is sunny periods and temperatures approaching 20degC.
    Even more sun for Dover.
    So the odds on snow have to be quite long.
    Indeed. But who would back the BBC over @Leon - he’s known in NW1 as a keen forecaster.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,467

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
    Current BBC forecast for here is sunny periods and temperatures approaching 20degC.
    Even more sun for Dover.
    So the odds on snow have to be quite long.
    And the forecast for the next fortnight is predicting, at long, long last, a lengthy period of dry and passably warm weather. As opposed to alleging that it will improve in about a weeks' time, and then finding after a week has passed that the prediction was wholly inaccurate.

    Alleluia! Perhaps we will get something resembling a Summer after all?
    Some of us have been publicly forecasting a pattern change to warm and dry on or around 26 May for weeks now.

    But said poster is too modest to mention it.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279

    IanB2 said:

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Go back to predicting things after the event, perhaps.
    We await with bated breath to see if his forecast of snow over SE England transpires tomorrow
    Current BBC forecast for here is sunny periods and temperatures approaching 20degC.
    Even more sun for Dover.
    So the odds on snow have to be quite long.
    Indeed. But who would back the BBC over @Leon - he’s known in NW1 as a keen forecaster.
    'Keen' doesn't necessarily mean accurate.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,545

    What's this warm yellow ball doing in the sky?

    Weird.

    Thoughts and prayers with @Leon - what’s he going to do with himself now he can no longer whine endlessly about the weather?

    theweatherincamdentown.com
    Whine about Handelsblatt, UFOs, the biosecurity of the Wuhan lab, Critical Race Theory, UvL etc etc etc...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986
    LOL, Trump clearly wanted to distract everyone by starting a war.
  • Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Too busy wanking themselves crazy over the soap opera ...
    GB News are going to have a field day, if Sky and BBC keep up this nonesense.

    There’s a MASSIVE hole in the market for an adult, broadsheet broadcaster. As opposed to this tabloid crap we’ve had for the last year.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,853
    Can't believe the USA wanted to deliver more foreign policy from 20,000 feet :D
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210
    This edition of Hindsight Olympics is a drag.

    Test cricket with crowds back in 6 days thank goodness.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,568
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Fergus Walsh on the BBC has been an oasis of sanity compared to the poltical journalists covering this who have been uniformly awful
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
    Pfizer alone are saying 4bn doses this year. There will be plenty to go around.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,386
    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,279

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
    Sadly.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Really
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
    It depends on the production situation - the scale of what is planned makes what has been delivered so far look tiny.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 16,258
    The key revelation for me from Cummings - Ben and Marc Warner, the Warner Brothers, were a key part of our Mickey Mouse response to covid.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,386
    Dropping the f bomb.

    So classy.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,446
    edited May 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Too busy wanking themselves crazy over the soap opera ...
    GB News are going to have a field day, if Sky and BBC keep up this nonesense.

    There’s a MASSIVE hole in the market for an adult, broadsheet broadcaster. As opposed to this tabloid crap we’ve had for the last year.
    The accusation that Big Dom always thinks he is the smartest in the room, when he isn't...so many of the political hacks clearly think the same, but the tide has gone out and been revealed to be butt naked....yes i'm looking at you Prof Peston.

    At least with Big Dom, he does some reading.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 2,822
    edited May 2021

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    I wondered about that. What is the status of evidence given to this committee?

    Would it be permitted to give that evidence in a closed room?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Doubt it'll be considered in the public interest to prosecute.

    Oh, and now the F-bomb.

    Classic Dom!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    BBC have just apologised over the live feed for any language that may have offended you

    Really
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    It covers pets in no 10 ?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986
    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    No, wasn't that why he wouldn't appear in front of a select committee on Brexit stuff?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,386
    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    Though an individual’s right to approach their MP is an essential part of the democratic process,this has to be balanced against the rights of others, including potentially the right to a fair trial and the right to privacy. Extending qualified privilege to all forms of correspondence could allow constituents effectively to ignore any legislation or court order that required information to be kept confidential. This would potentially include breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1989 or the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and could undermine the rule of law.

    and

    123. The list set out in the Schedule includes the following speech offences:
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up racial or religious hatred, under the
    Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006;
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual
    orientation, under the Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Criminal Justice and
    Immigration Act 2008;
    • Threatening or abusive behaviour under Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010;
    • Encouragement of terrorism, under the Terrorism Act 2006;
    • Criminal contempt of court under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (which makes it a strict
    liability offence to publish material which creates a substantial risk of prejudice or impediment to
    active court proceedings. “Publication” includes communication by speech); and
    • Breach of the Official Secrets Act 1989.


    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79390/consultation.pdf
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210
    Carrie not coming out of this well.

    Isn't she the driving force behind this net zero taxation tsunami ?
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    @Leon

    Cummings now talking about aliens... :hushed:
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    edited May 2021
    Hunt taking Cummings apart here

    And he has just conceded he was wrong
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,800

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Too busy wanking themselves crazy over the soap opera ...
    GB News are going to have a field day, if Sky and BBC keep up this nonesense.

    There’s a MASSIVE hole in the market for an adult, broadsheet broadcaster. As opposed to this tabloid crap we’ve had for the last year.
    The accusation that Big Dom always thinks he is the smartest in the room, when he isn't...so many of the political hacks clearly think the same, but the tide has gone out and been revealed to be butt naked....yes i'm looking at you Prof Peston.

    At least with Big Dom, he does some reading.
    He is proof that reading and understanding are two different things.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Too busy wanking themselves crazy over the soap opera ...
    GB News are going to have a field day, if Sky and BBC keep up this nonesense.

    There’s a MASSIVE hole in the market for an adult, broadsheet broadcaster. As opposed to this tabloid crap we’ve had for the last year.
    The accusation that Big Dom always thinks he is the smartest in the room, when he isn't...so many of the political hacks clearly think the same, but the tide has gone out and been revealed to be butt naked....yes i'm looking at you Prof Peston.

    At least with Big Dom, he does some reading.
    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.....

    The problem is that the whole political circus is designed around the idea that saying "I don't know the answer" is the fatal reply.

    Imagine if a minister said in an interview "I don't know the answer to that question." - he/she would be out of a job before the end of the interview. As opposed to "Well, Barry, {insert waffle here}"
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,446
    edited May 2021

    Hunt taking Cummings apart here

    I have to say I have been impressed with Hunt during the pandemic. He has often made very sensible criticisms / suggestions of practical things that could be done e.g. school remain for kids of key workers
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986
    edited May 2021
    Why is Hunt talking about preventing a lockdown? I get people weren't happy about Liverpool v Atletico and the Gold Cup. But Cummings was right when he said that cancelling those things are pointless if you don't shut pubs etc.

    There never was some magic middle road through this.
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,568

    Carrie not coming out of this well.

    Isn't she the driving force behind this net zero taxation tsunami ?

    Yes, she is. More insanity.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    Sean_F said:

    As he delivers his testimony, 75% of the public don't trust Dominic Cummings to tell the truth about how the government handled the pandemic. 55% don't trust Boris Johnson either, however...


    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1397479385171701760?s=20

    You don’t have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun your companion.
    And Con voters trust only one of them decisively....
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,986

    Hunt taking Cummings apart here

    I have to say I have been impressed with Hunt during the pandemic. He has often made very sensible criticisms / suggestions of practical things that could be done e.g. school remain for kids of key workers
    But he's an idiot for caring so much about Cheltenham etc.
  • pingping Posts: 3,282
    edited May 2021
    This is outrageous;

    England’s NHS plans to share patient records with third parties

    55m patients have until June 23 to opt out of having their health data scraped into a new database.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/9fee812f-6975-49ce-915c-aeb25d3dd748

    Medical history should be entirely confidential unless requested by the police via court order, IMO.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    Fascinating stuff from the Committee, for political nerds and lawyers etc, but this is going to be thin gruel i think for the media. Not following every single word, but i'm not sensing that Boris is coming out of this particularly badly or that there is anything bad for him or which can't be contextualised in a less damaging way. Cummings isn't coming out of it very well so far. Hunt doing an excellent job on him at moment.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    Though an individual’s right to approach their MP is an essential part of the democratic process,this has to be balanced against the rights of others, including potentially the right to a fair trial and the right to privacy. Extending qualified privilege to all forms of correspondence could allow constituents effectively to ignore any legislation or court order that required information to be kept confidential. This would potentially include breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1989 or the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and could undermine the rule of law.

    and

    123. The list set out in the Schedule includes the following speech offences:
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up racial or religious hatred, under the
    Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006;
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual
    orientation, under the Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Criminal Justice and
    Immigration Act 2008;
    • Threatening or abusive behaviour under Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010;
    • Encouragement of terrorism, under the Terrorism Act 2006;
    • Criminal contempt of court under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (which makes it a strict
    liability offence to publish material which creates a substantial risk of prejudice or impediment to
    active court proceedings. “Publication” includes communication by speech); and
    • Breach of the Official Secrets Act 1989.


    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79390/consultation.pdf
    That’s about communications between MPs and their constituents, rather than Committee hearings. My understanding was that the latter operate to the same rules as MPs speaking in the House of Commons.
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
    Pfizer alone are saying 4bn doses this year. There will be plenty to go around.
    But presumably not 4bn by September?

    At some point there will be plenty to go round, but vaccines will reach those who need it the most later if rich countries take a billion doses in the Autumn to give people 3rd shots, when there will probably be hardly anyone who has already had 2 shots dying in those countries.

    I wouldn't be able to take a 3rd shot this year if it has almost zero chance of giving me any benefit, when the same shot could save lives elsewhere!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    That is not an unreasonable assumption on the vaccine at the time

    The number of people that had antibody protection via vaccine on the last day of 2020 was perhaps 1/2 a million. For all intents and purposes the working assumption, no vaccine in 2020 was entirely correct.
    It was my understanding that by any previous experience, a vaccine being ready to use in 2020 was something close to ridiculous.

    What happened was the war-time-development* effect on process and systems - enough pressure was applied to reduce actions in the vaccine creation process to what *needed* to be done, rather than "but, traditionally..."

    *In operational research, this effect is well known and rather interesting.
    One of the most interesting questions for the next time from the long Cummings Twitter thread is whether we could reduce the time required to prove and approve a vaccine even further by using human challenge trials.

    If we'd been able to start vaccinating people in September, or even earlier, that would have made a huge difference
    The big question is whether the mRNA technology can be used to tweak the vaccine, without requiring a full re-trial, IIRC
    I thought the government have already said yes.
    Saying yes doesn't mean actually getting it through approval etc. My understanding is that the tweaked versions of the vaccine for the planned September shots will go through standard trials. MaxPB??
    IIRC it will be a similar process to the annual influenza vaccines. No full trials, only brief safety testing.
    Surely unpalatable for most people to have a 3rd shot, when there are loads of people including very vulnerable and frontline health workers who have been unable to even get a first shot.

    I mean it depends a bit how things develop, but there's also some self-interest in rich countries working to help the rest of the world before giving own populations 3rd shots.
    Hopefully, by then, the production issues will be out of the way. If the production levels planned are realised, we will be up to our ears in vaccines.
    But much of the world will be very far from up to their ears by September!
    Pfizer alone are saying 4bn doses this year. There will be plenty to go around.
    But presumably not 4bn by September?

    At some point there will be plenty to go round, but vaccines will reach those who need it the most later if rich countries take a billion doses in the Autumn to give people 3rd shots, when there will probably be hardly anyone who has already had 2 shots dying in those countries.

    I wouldn't be able to take a 3rd shot this year if it has almost zero chance of giving me any benefit, when the same shot could save lives elsewhere!
    The biggest issue by the end of the year will be distribution, not supply.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,800

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    This is actually very interesting stuff. Just not for the reasons the press were expecting.

    Maybe at some point, they might think about getting their science and medicine journalists to report on the Health Select Committee?
    Too busy wanking themselves crazy over the soap opera ...
    GB News are going to have a field day, if Sky and BBC keep up this nonesense.

    There’s a MASSIVE hole in the market for an adult, broadsheet broadcaster. As opposed to this tabloid crap we’ve had for the last year.
    The accusation that Big Dom always thinks he is the smartest in the room, when he isn't...so many of the political hacks clearly think the same, but the tide has gone out and been revealed to be butt naked....yes i'm looking at you Prof Peston.

    At least with Big Dom, he does some reading.
    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.....

    It's not the knowledge that's dangerous. It's the arrogance that goes with it.

  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,923

    BBC have just apologised over the live feed for any language that may have offended you

    Really

    and Sky
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,386
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    Though an individual’s right to approach their MP is an essential part of the democratic process,this has to be balanced against the rights of others, including potentially the right to a fair trial and the right to privacy. Extending qualified privilege to all forms of correspondence could allow constituents effectively to ignore any legislation or court order that required information to be kept confidential. This would potentially include breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1989 or the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and could undermine the rule of law.

    and

    123. The list set out in the Schedule includes the following speech offences:
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up racial or religious hatred, under the
    Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006;
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual
    orientation, under the Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Criminal Justice and
    Immigration Act 2008;
    • Threatening or abusive behaviour under Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010;
    • Encouragement of terrorism, under the Terrorism Act 2006;
    • Criminal contempt of court under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (which makes it a strict
    liability offence to publish material which creates a substantial risk of prejudice or impediment to
    active court proceedings. “Publication” includes communication by speech); and
    • Breach of the Official Secrets Act 1989.


    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79390/consultation.pdf
    That’s about communications between MPs and their constituents, rather than Committee hearings. My understanding was that the latter operate to the same rules as MPs speaking in the House of Commons.
    See chapter seven.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,145
    edited May 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    Though an individual’s right to approach their MP is an essential part of the democratic process,this has to be balanced against the rights of others, including potentially the right to a fair trial and the right to privacy. Extending qualified privilege to all forms of correspondence could allow constituents effectively to ignore any legislation or court order that required information to be kept confidential. This would potentially include breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1989 or the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and could undermine the rule of law.

    and

    123. The list set out in the Schedule includes the following speech offences:
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up racial or religious hatred, under the
    Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006;
    • Use of threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual
    orientation, under the Public Order Act 1986 as amended by the Criminal Justice and
    Immigration Act 2008;
    • Threatening or abusive behaviour under Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010;
    • Encouragement of terrorism, under the Terrorism Act 2006;
    • Criminal contempt of court under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (which makes it a strict
    liability offence to publish material which creates a substantial risk of prejudice or impediment to
    active court proceedings. “Publication” includes communication by speech); and
    • Breach of the Official Secrets Act 1989.


    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79390/consultation.pdf
    That’s about communications between MPs and their constituents, rather than Committee hearings. My understanding was that the latter operate to the same rules as MPs speaking in the House of Commons.
    I was going to ask about that.

    Is it OK for Dom to retain such information after departing thee Govt, never mind publish it on Twitter?

    If they are talking about it, presumably the Parl Committee should be in camera?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 4,993
    Does Dommo have his eye on a GB News vehicle, as a launchpad for a shot at winning Strictly?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 4,993

    @Leon

    Cummings now talking about aliens... :hushed:

    What did he say
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,171
    This Cummings stuff is comedy gold if nothing else.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    edited May 2021
    Beth Rigby

    Cummings describes the meeting with PM the next day after McNamara remarks

    'It was a like a scene from Independence Day with Warner as Jeff Goldblum' saying the aliens are coming'

    This evidence is indeed mind - blowing

    And this from the journalist who broke covid rules with Kay Burley
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,752
    PS: I hope everybody watching it live on BBC Parliament channel has paid their licence fee. :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,446
    edited May 2021

    It strikes me that Dom is being pretty straightforward and honest to the Committee. If he'd adopted the same approach to his Barnard Castle trip, with a groveling apology, his reputation could well have remained intact. Such an error to bullshit about that trip.

    I said at the time, if he just told the truth, as a father and a husband, scared about what might happen...but I made a mistake, resigned...he would have been back by the end of the year, especially now so many others have been found to do the same or worse.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Things that I wasn't expecting to come from today:

    Now I want to watch Independence Day again.
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210
    Cummings confirming the PM and cabinet were getting duff data.

    Difficult to see how that is bad for Boris.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,459
    edited May 2021

    It strikes me that Dom is being pretty straightforward and honest to the Committee. If he'd adopted the same approach to his Barnard Castle trip, with a groveling apology, his reputation could well have remained intact. Such an error to bullshit about that trip.

    It was a nudge-nudge-wink-wink Trumpian posture, part of the proudly shameless tone of the administration at the time, and complete with the played-up Durham accent to identify as "anti- elite".
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,145
    ping said:

    This is outrageous;

    England’s NHS plans to share patient records with third parties

    55m patients have until June 23 to opt out of having their health data scraped into a new database.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/9fee812f-6975-49ce-915c-aeb25d3dd748

    Medical history should be entirely confidential unless requested by the police via court order, IMO.

    Agree on that. We had something similar under Blair-Brown about 12-15 years ago. Here is a quote of part of the text.

    England’s NHS is preparing to scrape the medical histories of 55m patients, including sensitive information on mental and sexual health, criminal records and abuse, into a database it will share with third parties.

    The data collection project, which is the first of its kind, has caused an uproar among privacy campaigners, who say it is “legally problematic”, especially as patients only have a few weeks to opt out of the plan.

    NHS Digital, which runs the health service’s IT systems, confirmed the plan to pool together medical records from every patient in England who is registered with a GP clinic into a single lake that will be available to academic and commercial third parties for research and planning purposes.

    Cori Crider, co-founder of Foxglove, a campaign group for digital rights, said: “We all want to see the NHS come out of the pandemic stronger” but noted that the NHS had been “completely silent” on who would have access to the data.

    ...

    Foxglove has issued a legal letter to the Department of Health and Social Care, questioning the lawfulness of the plans under current data protection laws, and threatening further legal action.

    Rosa Curling, a solicitor at Foxglove, wrote in the letter that she had “serious concerns” about the legality of the move because no explicit consent had been given and “very few members of the public will be aware that the new processing is imminent, directly affecting their personal medical data”.

    Patients have until June 23 to opt out by filling in a form and taking it to their GP before their historical records will become a permanent and irreversible part of the new data set. Patients who opt out after the deadline can stop future data from being funnelled into the new system.


    One or an email to MPss, perhaps.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,386
    You can't trust Dom Cummings.

    Never trust a man who dresses like a scruff/Jeremy Corbyn.

    Do up all your shirt buttons and put on a tie.

    You're addressing the mother of all parliaments.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 352
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    Parliamentary privilege, surely?
    No, wasn't that why he wouldn't appear in front of a select committee on Brexit stuff?
    As someone with a former professional involvement with Select Committees I can authoritatively say the following:

    Privilege applies to whatever a witness says in a Select Committee. Dom couldn't be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act for revealing something in a Committee meeting. Privilege wouldn't protect him from other consequences of his testimony (for example if he were still employed by the government he could be dismissed for keeping unauthorised records) but in practice the Committee would take a dim view of any employer or agency penalising someone for their involvement in a Committee inquiry. Also the police can't use what's said in a Committee as the basis to open an investigation. If you confessed to murder in a Committee meeting the police couldn't use that as the reason to issue an arrest warrant, although of course they could probably come up with another reason.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687
    Can't wait to hear from Rebecca Long Bailey...
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,568

    You can't trust Dom Cummings.

    Never trust a man who dresses like a scruff/Jeremy Corbyn.

    Do up all your shirt buttons and put on a tie.

    You're addressing the mother of all parliaments.

    Morning TSE. Nice to see you to see you... :D
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210



    And this from the journalist who broke covid rules with Kay Burley

    Perhaps she was bullied into going out for a party.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345

    Cummings confirming the PM and cabinet were getting duff data.

    Difficult to see how that is bad for Boris.

    I have not heard anything that damages Boris, but it is clear Cummings is attacking most everyone while at the same time apologising for his own inactions
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687



    And this from the journalist who broke covid rules with Kay Burley

    Perhaps she was bullied into going out for a party.
    To be fair we've all been there
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,145
    Taz said:

    Carrie not coming out of this well.

    Isn't she the driving force behind this net zero taxation tsunami ?

    Yes, she is. More insanity.
    Which Tsunami?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    Cummings just dished Hancock
  • HarryFreemanHarryFreeman Posts: 210
    Hancock meet underside of bus.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Can't wait to hear from Rebecca Long Bailey...

    Hopefully it’s a very long wait.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,056

    It strikes me that Dom is being pretty straightforward and honest to the Committee. If he'd adopted the same approach to his Barnard Castle trip, with a groveling apology, his reputation could well have remained intact. Such an error to bullshit about that trip.

    I said at the time, if he just told the truth, as a father and a husband, scared about what might happen...but I made a mistake, resigned...he would have been back by the end of the year, especially now so many others have been found to do the same or worse.
    He didn't even need to resign. He just needed to say sorry and ensure that Boris didn't accept his resignation...

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,523
    Cummings is team dishy Rishi it sounds like.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,545

    Text from a friend.

    Dom's just broken the Official Secrets Act there.

    How?
This discussion has been closed.