France, Germany, Italy all continuing to vaccinate at higher rates than the UK in recent weeks.
When I pointed this out a couple of weeks ago I was told it was all down to the Bank Holiday effect.
What's the reason now?
They have more people to jab.
I don't think anyone ever doubted the EU nations could jab at high rates, it was the slow start that was the issue for them, not that they could not go fast eventually.
Its worth noting that Canada and the EU are gaining from the fact that their neighbours, the USA and UK are slowing down.
The USA running out of demand and slowing down has almost exactly mirrored Canada's increase in doses in recent weeks. Now that the Americans aren't using the doses, the Canadians can. Same here. The AZN manufactory isn't needing to send its doses to the UK as we've finished with it, so they can go to Europe now.
That's a good thing, and needs to be replicated worldwide. In a few months time Canada and Europe will catch up with the USA and UK, the doses need to go to third world or other countries then.
This is a really important point, and is also a very encouraging one.
And as I keep saying, we have waited a month too long. We could have been doing 18 year olds a month ago if we had started to use AZN again. But we couldn't, we couldn't even do more than 100k-150k first doses a day.
Its all a bit of a mute point now, because we have missed the windows. We could have been doing 100ks of extra jabs. Even 150k extra a day for a week, a month ago, thats an extra million people. That million that signed up in a day, we could have done weeks before.
And as I've been saying the JCVI have said that million were at more risk from the clots than they were from Covid. Even from that link you gave earlier, that cohort is still at more risk from clots than from Covid. This is your own link that you shared, not a paper I'd read, but I assume you trust it - look at the 20-29 image.
Our vaccine rollout has public trust because of the independence, trustworthiness and integrity of the JCVI - and you wish to throw that away by over-ruling them for what purpose exactly? 18+ are currently able to get Pfizer, which is safer for them, quicker acting and will allow a 3-4 week gap for second dose rather than needing a longer gap for the second dose too.
Risk of ICU for COVID != stopping the spread.....vaccinations aren't really about the individual (outside of obviously the oldies). For everybody else it is really about the community and stopping spread. Hence why those that say well I'm not at risk, so I don't need to get jabbed are idiots.
That is what happened in Bolton, they got in there and jabbed a load of people and it looks like it locally had an impact.
And I never said overrule the JCVI, have they remodelled their risk assessment since the Indian variant? I haven't heard that they have. Their previous risk assessment was based upon low case numbers of a less troublesome variant.
Sorry but you're wrong there, the JCVI have always modelled this based upon the individual and not simply spread and quite rightly too: injecting healthy people with a potentially harmful substance, where the risks outweigh the rewards, is an ethical conundrum that has not been tackled. Nor has it needed to be tackled since Pfizer and Moderna exist.
You're acting like a Zero Covid extremist concentrating on one issue and one issue alone.
Under 30s getting jabbed now with Pfizer reduces community spread, but also its more beneficial to the recipient than not getting jabbed. Regrettably the same can not be said according to the JCVI about AstraZeneca, hence why its use is discontinued.
PS That chart you shared is based upon prevalence and spread of cases today, not prevalence and spread months ago, hence why the over 30 risk ratio has changed based upon today's data, but the under thirties is still clear because even with our rising rates they're still pretty low.
You are answering a different question....the JCVI advice was based on a different variant and different public health situation.
Have they remodelled things? I haven't read anywhere that they have.
They also stated that AZN could still be used if it was causing a delay in the vaccine rollout. Now you might say well its still on target, but IMO the target needed to have been updated given the new variant and rising cases...and if they had, no way they would be able to speed up without AZN.
Due to linked supply they can't even properly blitz hotspots.
Drunk Scots with nowhere to go predictably causing trouble in London.
I am sure there is a pandemic on.
There is going to be a great photo book of all the stupid large public gatherings that were held during this pandemic, with people in a 100 year time, going look at those morons....people in olden times must have been totally braindead.
And as I keep saying, we have waited a month too long. We could have been doing 18 year olds a month ago if we had started to use AZN again. But we couldn't, we couldn't even do more than 100k-150k first doses a day.
Its all a bit of a mute point now, because we have missed the windows. We could have been doing 100ks of extra jabs. Even 150k extra a day for a week, a month ago, thats an extra million people. That million that signed up in a day, we could have done weeks before.
And as I've been saying the JCVI have said that million were at more risk from the clots than they were from Covid. Even from that link you gave earlier, that cohort is still at more risk from clots than from Covid. This is your own link that you shared, not a paper I'd read, but I assume you trust it - look at the 20-29 image.
Our vaccine rollout has public trust because of the independence, trustworthiness and integrity of the JCVI - and you wish to throw that away by over-ruling them for what purpose exactly? 18+ are currently able to get Pfizer, which is safer for them, quicker acting and will allow a 3-4 week gap for second dose rather than needing a longer gap for the second dose too.
Risk of ICU for COVID != stopping the spread.....vaccinations aren't really about the individual (outside of obviously the oldies). For everybody else it is really about the community and stopping spread. Hence why those that say well I'm not at risk, so I don't need to get jabbed are idiots.
That is what happened in Bolton, they got in there and jabbed a load of people and it looks like it locally had an impact.
And I never said overrule the JCVI, have they remodelled their risk assessment since the Indian variant? I haven't heard that they have. Their previous risk assessment was based upon low case numbers of a less troublesome variant.
Sorry but you're wrong there, the JCVI have always modelled this based upon the individual and not simply spread and quite rightly too: injecting healthy people with a potentially harmful substance, where the risks outweigh the rewards, is an ethical conundrum that has not been tackled. Nor has it needed to be tackled since Pfizer and Moderna exist.
You're acting like a Zero Covid extremist concentrating on one issue and one issue alone.
Under 30s getting jabbed now with Pfizer reduces community spread, but also its more beneficial to the recipient than not getting jabbed. Regrettably the same can not be said according to the JCVI about AstraZeneca, hence why its use is discontinued.
PS That chart you shared is based upon prevalence and spread of cases today, not prevalence and spread months ago, hence why the over 30 risk ratio has changed based upon today's data, but the under thirties is still clear because even with our rising rates they're still pretty low.
You are answering a different question....the JCVI advice was based on a different variant and different public health situation.
Have they remodelled things? I haven't read anywhere that they have.
They also stated that AZN could still be used if it was causing a delay in the vaccine rollout. Now you might say well its still on target, but IMO the target needed to have been updated given the new variant and rising cases...and if they had, no way they would be able to speed up without AZN.
Due to linked supply they can't even properly blitz hotspots.
But they have blitzed hotspots. I live near, not in, the main hotspot and vaccines have been available for all over 18s for more than 3 weeks now. I'm getting texts on a daily basis, as is the rest of Lancashire it seems.
And don't forget Pfizer is faster working, so blitzing the hotspots with Pfizer (which has been done) means that it gets to work faster than using the more dangerous AstraZeneca which takes weeks longer for immunity to get to work and which would put more people off from getting vaccinated.
Which don't forget is what we're dealing with now. Everyone who wanted to be vaccinated has been pretty much (18-20 only became eligible today officially but everyone else already was). Over 80% of adults have been jabbed. So now its a case of rounding up those who are vaccine hesitant.
Playing fast and loose with vaccines that cause known side effects that the JCVI has warned against is not going to aid you in reaching those who are hesitant.
Imagine how much of a soap opera it would have been if he was the brother of the PM.
Given Jezza won't get vaccinated either and repeatedly seen lockdown rules as optional, I can only imagine what the whole soap opera of PM Corbyn would have done during this pandemic. He certainly wouldn't have funded any Big Pharma vaccine research.
Imagine how much of a soap opera it would have been if he was the brother of the PM.
Given Jezza won't get vaccinated either, I can only imagine what the whole soap opera of PM Corbyn would have done during this pandemic. He certainly wouldn't have funded any Big Pharma vaccine research.
He'd probably have invested in the Cuban vaccine programme.
Imagine how much of a soap opera it would have been if he was the brother of the PM.
Given Jezza won't get vaccinated either, I can only imagine what the whole soap opera of PM Corbyn would have done during this pandemic. He certainly wouldn't have funded any Big Pharma vaccine research.
He'd probably have invested in the Cuban vaccine programme.
Tonight was surprisingly good. I met some absolute gentleman Scots fans before and after the game. One gave me a uefa fitba on the tube. Obviously the Tartan Army oiks in Leicester Square are less enticing but someone has to subside M&M world.
Game was dreadful and if we fall before the semi finals it’s probably time for Southgate to exit stage left. Not that the FA care about the fans. My mate got a ‘historic’ programme for me and subsequently lost it. We agreed after the match it was probably for the best.
Imagine how much of a soap opera it would have been if he was the brother of the PM.
Given Jezza won't get vaccinated either, I can only imagine what the whole soap opera of PM Corbyn would have done during this pandemic. He certainly wouldn't have funded any Big Pharma vaccine research.
He'd probably have invested in the Cuban vaccine programme.
Rebecca Long-Bailey on that Nazi News Network this evening....I presume the twitter army will be doing their nut, having one of their own go on such a station.
Why would eg a trans girl [a biological born boy] want to be a girl, if there's no such thing as girls anymore and they can't be called a girl since you can't say girl for anyone? It doesn't make any sense.
My wife put it well to me this week - we are both 100% in favour of gay rights, transgender rights etc - but the issue is that when gay marriage was debated the retort was "well just because gays can get married doesn't mean you have to marry someone of the same sex". It didn't affect straight people which made their objections petty and easy to dismiss. My wife and I got married about the same week that Parliament legalised gay marriage, and gays being able to have joy like us was a pure unmitigated good thing. But people saying that my wife isn't a woman, can't be called a woman, can't breastfeed etc, etc, etc that takes away from her and every other woman on the planet.
Gay marriage didn't entail telling straight people they can't get married. Trans rights should not entail telling women they're not women.
I can't read the Telegraph article (£££) but the snippet I can see seems to be suggesting Stonewall want to teachers to use gender neutral terms such as learners rather than girls or boys. In the context of education where historic biases exist (e.g boys directed to science; girls to arts) I can seen some sense in that.
Some of the more extreme pronouncements from progressive groups are, shall we say, a bit outside the Overton window and designed to shock and/or play to the true believers. Best to ignore those - everyone else will.
Some of the advice mentioned by the Telegraph seems unexceptional:- Stonewall’s advice to educators also includes that teachers should not use 'boy, girl, boy, girl' when lining pupils up and ditch phrases such as 'man up' and 'don't be such a girl'.
Aren’t England practically in the next round already anyway? Guaranteed third in the group and 4/6 3rds go through don’t they? Group A v unlikely to do it
England are virtually guaranteed 2nd at least. To drop to 3rd they would have to loose to the Czechs and see Scotland beat Coratia, and one of these results would have to be by 2 or more clear goals.
So it’s all good until we go a goal down against the Czechs in the first half….
Why would eg a trans girl [a biological born boy] want to be a girl, if there's no such thing as girls anymore and they can't be called a girl since you can't say girl for anyone? It doesn't make any sense.
My wife put it well to me this week - we are both 100% in favour of gay rights, transgender rights etc - but the issue is that when gay marriage was debated the retort was "well just because gays can get married doesn't mean you have to marry someone of the same sex". It didn't affect straight people which made their objections petty and easy to dismiss. My wife and I got married about the same week that Parliament legalised gay marriage, and gays being able to have joy like us was a pure unmitigated good thing. But people saying that my wife isn't a woman, can't be called a woman, can't breastfeed etc, etc, etc that takes away from her and every other woman on the planet.
Gay marriage didn't entail telling straight people they can't get married. Trans rights should not entail telling women they're not women.
I can't read the Telegraph article (£££) but the snippet I can see seems to be suggesting Stonewall want to teachers to use gender neutral terms such as learners rather than girls or boys. In the context of education where historic biases exist (e.g boys directed to science; girls to arts) I can seen some sense in that.
Some of the more extreme pronouncements from progressive groups are, shall we say, a bit outside the Overton window and designed to shock and/or play to the true believers. Best to ignore those - everyone else will.
Some of the advice mentioned by the Telegraph seems unexceptional:- Stonewall’s advice to educators also includes that teachers should not use 'boy, girl, boy, girl' when lining pupils up and ditch phrases such as 'man up' and 'don't be such a girl'.
The bit on lining up is silly and shows they know nothing about children and child behaviour, and the second part contains phrases that are prohibited anyway.
Honestly, if that’s correct they’re coming across as ignorant as Amanda Spielman.
Comments
Have they remodelled things? I haven't read anywhere that they have.
They also stated that AZN could still be used if it was causing a delay in the vaccine rollout. Now you might say well its still on target, but IMO the target needed to have been updated given the new variant and rising cases...and if they had, no way they would be able to speed up without AZN.
Due to linked supply they can't even properly blitz hotspots.
I am sure there is a pandemic on.
There is going to be a great photo book of all the stupid large public gatherings that were held during this pandemic, with people in a 100 year time, going look at those morons....people in olden times must have been totally braindead.
https://twitter.com/davesgould/status/1405907052111802368?s=20
And don't forget Pfizer is faster working, so blitzing the hotspots with Pfizer (which has been done) means that it gets to work faster than using the more dangerous AstraZeneca which takes weeks longer for immunity to get to work and which would put more people off from getting vaccinated.
Which don't forget is what we're dealing with now. Everyone who wanted to be vaccinated has been pretty much (18-20 only became eligible today officially but everyone else already was). Over 80% of adults have been jabbed. So now its a case of rounding up those who are vaccine hesitant.
Playing fast and loose with vaccines that cause known side effects that the JCVI has warned against is not going to aid you in reaching those who are hesitant.
Game was dreadful and if we fall before the semi finals it’s probably time for Southgate to exit stage left. Not that the FA care about the fans. My mate got a ‘historic’ programme for me and subsequently lost it. We agreed after the match it was probably for the best.
Stonewall’s advice to educators also includes that teachers should not use 'boy, girl, boy, girl' when lining pupils up and ditch phrases such as 'man up' and 'don't be such a girl'.
Honestly, if that’s correct they’re coming across as ignorant as Amanda Spielman.
Well so are France and Italy but they've extended the age limit down to 12.