Re: Coronavirus
 

The EU approach to the vaccine issue is like the EU turning up at the AZ butcher on Christmas eve morning and ordering 90 turkeys...............


EU - "Our French supplier hasn't got any so we're short"

AZ - "We'll do our best but were not geared up to give you all 90."

EU - "Well you're supplying Britain?"

AZ - "Yes but they ordered 5 months ago and helped build the farm. We can give you what we've got, maybe 30"

EU- "But we didn't know if it worked 5 months ago"

AZ - "Neither did the UK but they had faith in their science and invested money on behalf of the world"

EU - "Well I'll sue you then...and tell everyone your turkeys are poisonous"

Later that day...

EU - "Sorry about that, your turkeys are fine but now no one wants your turkey. However even though we've got 7 spare at home, we still demand the 90 turkeys, oh and by the way this isn't our fault"

Re: Coronavirus
 

The EU should recognise that where a product is supplied in two parts, specially with a time constraint on it's supply, then the supplier is contractually obliged to supplied the 2nd part, once it has delivered the 1st part. Pfizer need to supply the UK with the required 2nd doses.

Perhaps the UK could reassure the EU, that any Pfizer vaccine supplied will only initially only be used for 2nd doses.

Re: Coronavirus
 

On Friday I booked my first Jab, which I will get Monday morning at 9:20am, best of all its a 5 minute drive away.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I was browsing back through this thread this afternoon and came across this absolute nugget, from the mid-November days when the first vaccine trials results started coming through and we all started looking closely at what the UK and EU had in their preorder portfolios. At issue here was the fact that the EU had preordered from Moderna and we hadn’t.

How I LOLed. :rofl:

Re: Coronavirus
 

A classic example of Mr K's insight.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Spot on.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They are corrupt to the core and a pathetic con job organisation. 17.4 Million still make me proud.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don’t really see how that can be true. It’s not an absolute ban it’s simply moving as emerging data improves. If we are truly interested in the “entire planet” we should remove the IP rights on all vaccines and get production ramped up. Otherwise a time delay on subset of the population in France is likely to have negligible impact on the global response or inevitable emergence of vaccine resistant mutations.

However some good news that should finally end the uncertainty is the outcome of the Phase 3 US clinical trials showing 79% efficacy. While not one to necessarily trust the BBC quick fire analysis the published data should let more independent sources crunch the numbers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The USA says AZ is a-ok: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56479462

They're asking for FDA approval.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Where is your evidence that a block on IP rights is being imposed and is causing delays? For the AZ vaccine, the only requirement that might be a sticking point, is that it has to be supplied at cost.
The EU is threatening to hijack IP rights, but then what? They would still need to build and set up any manufacturing sites, and that takes time. Are they planning to produce AZ vaccine for a profit?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I wasn't referring to the EU specifically but it stands to reason that if anyone could manufacture any of the vaccines it would ramp up production.

While there would be some scope for unscrupulous profiteering in the short term as supply ramped up to meet demand this would be limited.

My only point was that limiting who can (and where) a vaccine can be manufactured creates supply side blocks. Even when the UK, EU and USA have all been vaccinated we are some considerable distance from the "entire planet" being vaccinated which was the point I was addressing about delays in the French under 55s being vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Many countries do produce vaccines. Where is your evidence that anybody is being blocked from using any IP?
The EU has set up new sites and expanded existing ones. Their problem is they left it too late and/or are for vaccines not yet approved.
The world's third biggest vaccine maker, Sanofi of France, came up with duds. That will have delayed EU production massively. That was the "luck of the draw". AZ vaccine might have turned out to be a dud, as with Pfizer, Moderna, etc.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not sure the point you are arguing to be honest.

Clearly the manufacturers are holding exclusive rights over their own vaccines. This isn't surprising - it's industry standard.

Nobody can just open a plant in India, China or elsewhere and start making the vaccines at cost without infringing on the rights of Pfizer, Astrazenica, Moderna or anyone else who has a successful vaccine candidate.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You stated "If we are truly interested in the “entire planet” we should remove the IP rights on all vaccines and get production ramped up.". What difference would that make unless there has been a block on somebody producing it?
It takes time to expand an existing plant or open a new one. Eg Some French investment of June 2020 has yet to come online.

The UK benefited from government investment in vaccine production before last year. We got ahead of the game.
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

The word we are discussing here is Biosimilars. Which are 'generic' biological drugs. Freeing up the IP would create a big biosimilar market. A lot of countries such as India, Gulf states, Brazil, Turkey, South Africa are getting big into biosimilars.

There are some issues with skills. If you look at countries who do a lot of pharmaceutical work, you tend to find the companies are quite bunched together. Ireland is a great example with LOADS of companies based around Dublin and Cork. Ireland invested heavily some years back to grow a pharmaceutical industry through targeted education and big tax breaks. There is now a critical mass of educated people in Ireland who tend to flit from company to company and Ireland is an attractive country to set up shop now.

Countries need to grow that skills base or buy it in. India is growing it, the gulf states are buying it in.

One big reason why companies won't release their IP for these vaccines is that the technology can be very useful once known. Once you know how to modify and produce an adenovirus or mRNA vaccine for one disease, it takes no time to make a different vaccine. This is how the AZ and Pfizer vaccines came out so quick. Knowing how to make a vaccine quickly is great but you wouldn't want to spread that around too much.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m still not sure what that has to do with the point I’ve made.

It does indeed take time to expand plants and capacity. Which is why more people doing it would be beneficial.

There is a block on anyone other than the candidate vaccine manufacturers (or anyone doing so under licence) from producing any of their own vaccines. As I say it’s industry standard.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting thread (imho) on the history of this debacle

https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/stat...577761803?s=20

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yay for globalisation and complex supply chains, they turned out to be such a great idea ...

Re: Coronavirus
 

The EU did not order any vaccines from GSK-Sanofi. :confused:

Maybe a deal to ease some forms of Indian immigration into the UK in return:
https://www.ft.com/content/0049a35c-...d-e884672298c7

Re: Coronavirus
 

The EU would be the big looser here as the Pfizer vaccine is dependent upon supplies of a critical component from the UK as they've bad-mouthed the AZ one.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Still a load of Nationalist tripe and politicians trying to play it for themselves. The virus and it's variants don't care about petty politics. No country is immune in the long run if the virus isn't tackled everywhere and we don't work together and share resources/vaccines.

As ever, together we win, divided we lose. Humanity will never learn, which will lead to our ultimate downfall, whether it's a virus or more likely climate change.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

We all lose in such situations but AstraZeneca gets over 70% of its vaccine ingredients from the EU. In contrast, we supply the EU with just 17% of the ingredients used to make its vaccines.

The UK is indeed one of the suppliers for the Pfizer vaccine (lipid nanoparticles) but Merck now also produces the same ingredient in the EU.

https://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/70363

Re: Coronavirus
 

Only in several months time.

100% of Pfizer vaccine production is dependent on the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And banning imports to the Uk would only put them a week ahead of where they are now, it's all professional blow hardery in the wake of a pretty shambolic effort so far

Re: Coronavirus
 

They're accelerating production hence they're supplying Pfizer currently; ensuring that 100% of Pfizer vaccine is not dependent on the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The U.K would have to respond in kind but it's probably best to be cautious before the Government starts sabre-rattling. I think the EU leadership would want nothing better than for Boris Johnson to start making counter-threats and turn this into a Britain vs EU thing for the benefit of their domestic audience.

The U.K should wait and see what they actually do. Then see if it does actually impact us. If they do a tokenistic block of some vaccines from some factories then we should roll our eyes and take the moral high ground leaving the EU looking petulant and ineffective.

If they do start making a notable impact on our vaccine supply and schedules then we have to respond by blocking the export of the ingredients needed. We should also make overtures to European-based pharmaceutical companies to move more production to the U.K on the promise we won't block them from honoring their contracts.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was recently been confirmed on ITV news that an essential component is only produced in the UK and the US.
Link

Link

4 different lipids are used for the Pfizer vaccine. Others must be used for other products.

Link

Link

"Novel" as in new.

---------- Post added at 01:15 ---------- Previous post was at 00:58 ----------

My point over this, is that the EU goes on about reciprocity, when the UK is supplying 100% of an essential component for the Pfizer vaccine.
In general for a limited production product, it is first ordered, first supplied. The UK has ordered 100m doses of the AZ vaccine. The language used at the time of the pre-order strongly implied that the UK was at the head of the queue for being supplied. That was 3 months before any EU-related deal.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news...zeneca-vaccine

Americans kicking up a fuss (again) about Astrazenica paperwork from the clinical trial, potentially using outdated data that could skew efficacy and urging them to "ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible".

Be interesting to see if this holds up FDA approval.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Two months plus ago is a long time in Covid vaccination production. ;) My understanding is that Merck is now a parallel supplier to Croda and ramping up production all the time. However, putting this aside, Pfizer is a US company and its EU plant produces vaccine for all countries outside the US. Yes, even Canada has to get its Pfizer vaccines delivered from Belgium! For this reason, I am sure that Pfizer could tap its US supplier to temporarily fill a gap in UK supply. But I am happy to go on record and predict that Pfizer exports to the UK will not be banned.

Hugh cited the journalist Dave Keating's Tweet yesterday reiterating the EU deal was signed a day before the UK one. We all agree that the UK deal was more tightly worded meaning that no Covid 19 vaccines have been exported from the UK whilst needed in this country. By contrast, the EU has exported some 41 million vaccine doses with a quarter of these going to the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No. The production of AZ vaccine in the UK would stop dead as the AZ vaccine uses EU sourced ingredients and the production facilities are working 'hand to mouth' with little or no stock built up. On top of that, no Belgium produced Pfizer vaccines for the UK.

Nobody would gain from arbitrarily export controlling raw materials

Re: Coronavirus
 

I guess the US can afford to be perfectionist on this as its vaccination programme is going very well. However, surely any trial data has been superseded by the mass vaccination programmes in place across the World using the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Err no, that’s not *quite* what Keating said. The crucial tweet is this one:

Keating is making a very narrow technical point when he says the EU signed a purchasing agreement the day before the UK did. The fact is there was no immediate hurry for the UK to conclude precise purchase terms because priority of supply was already established, thanks to the UK government’s foresight in:

1. Funding vaccine research well before covid became a problem in the UK
2. Insisting that the eventual product must be manufactured in the UK so that supply to the UK could be assured
3. Ensuring terms relating to priority of supply were written in from the outset, and
4. Ensuring those terms were rolled on to AsraZeneca when it received the contract to manufacture.

UK priority does not arise from a later, but better, agreement than the one the EU signed. It arises from funding, negotiations and a priority of supply agreement between the UK and Oxford, and latterly AZ, that was all in place much, much earlier.

In this context the UK’s later conclusion of purchase terms is irrelevant - all the important supply terms were already in place.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I guess the issue is that while nobody is disputing it's safe and effective it's the absence of clear data from clinically controlled trials (and against variants) that makes it difficult to quantify how much and where to deploy which is why there is the call for transparency.

It might also make Governments rethink incentives to push people to get vaccinated if the herd immunity threshold is only going to be achieved with near 100% uptake.

Re: Coronavirus
 

June 2020
Link
May 2020
Link
Link
The AZ vaccine used technology funded by the UK way back in 2016.
The UK was funding development of the AZ vaccine more than a year ago.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Do get out old chap, its a lovely day, spring flowers, birds singing etc. ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

But let's not forget it is in the UKs interest for EU states to get over the pandemic and open up for business. Every time trade figures come out, some people go 'aha, Brexit!' and others go 'aha, COVID!' If the 'aha COVID!' people are right, then the restoring of normal economic activity in the EU can only be a good thing for the UKs trade figures.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Little point letting people from the EU into this country, if we still have a large number of people in this country yet unvaccinated.
As things stand, the EU is so large and behind in vaccinating people, that whatever is done it will be a long time before it would be safe for people from the EU to come here.
If pretty much the whole of the UK has been vaccinated, then there would be a lot less risk in allowing people to come here, and for people from the UK to go elsewhere(eg Spain). If X% of the UK were not yet vaccinated, that X% would be at risk from EU visitors, or to the EU if they went there.


One EU leader gets it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely it's in the UK's interests for every country to be vaccinated? It stops the virus spreading as much and therefore reduces its opportunity to mutate with its consequences on the need to limit overseas travel and the need for new vaccines.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

May I butt in with a couple of questions?

Has it yet been proven that the vaccine prevents you from catching Covid-19?

If it doesn't, can you catch it and spread it to others?

If you've had the first and second jab, then go out and mingle with people who have tested positive, would you still be 'told' by track & trace to isolate for a week?

It seems (to a fikko like me) that there are more grey areas than a library (remember those? ) full of pensioners :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Good advice.

For him.

Few days leave from this topic granted. [Amended to at least 2 days]

Cable Forum Topic holidays. ATOL Protected.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I am not taking part in any silences or clapping. I'm not patting this government on it's back particularly for the shabby way they are treating the nurses when if they had locked down at least a month earlier more lives might have been saved. Closing the borders was the FIRST thing they should have done.The only thing they got right was supporting finding a vaccine which was the very least thing they have done. The ONLY people who deserve any accolades are the key workers which is better dealt with by paying them a decent wage and hopefully a bonus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

If it's the expectation that the UK looks after its' own, then surely other countries or blocs of countries looking after their own is reasonable too?

The US has been doing this since day one of course with a ban on vaccine exports.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Members please note that Cable Forum Topic Holidays™ must be taken within the UK, in accordance with coronavirus restrictions. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

:clap: I'm sure a handclap on the steps of number 10 more than makes up for their miserly pay award.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Very good questions and it seems that the simple answer is we don't know for sure if any vaccine will stop infections and stop you spreading the bug. What we do know is that the vaccination makes the likelihood of you getting really sick and even dying much less. If everyone gets vaccinated, COVID at worst becomes the sniffles.

Here's a really good article on this here - https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00450-z

The best way to answer your questions is to do a challenge test where some hardy souls/heroes/people desperate for cash/complete mugs get deliberately infected with SARS-COV2. A trial is about to be started here in the UK - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/w...oval-in-the-uk

Re: Coronavirus
 

That looks like the basis of a great reality TV series!

With ITV missing out on Love Island this year due to the pandemic, this would seem like an ideal prime time schedule-filler for them. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Celebrity Covid, finally we get a reality TV program worth watching :tu:

Heck, I may even be inclined to join the public telephone vote as to which one gets the placebo :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is there any vaccine in existance that actually stops anyone being infected? Surely all a vaccine does is prepare the immune system to recognise and fight an infection quicker than the immune system starting from scratch.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not really, no as whatever infectious agent has to be in you for your immune system to act on it so you are to some extent 'infected'. A race is then on between the infectious agent multiplying and the immune system stamping it down.

Vaccines vary a lot in how much they stimulate the immune system. It does depend on how 'foreign' the disease is. A 'good' disease is one that can escape the immune system by either disguising the parts which the immune system recognises - see HIV or changing rapidly - see influenza.

You can help a bit by adding other agents which also stimulate the immune system. These are called adjuvants. When you hear about aluminium in vaccines, that is aluminium hydroxide powder which makes your immune system go crazy. It can also help by administering the vaccine through the same route as the disease (see Flumist flu vaccine and Polio vaccines) but that is really hard to do so they mostly get injected.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is the Pfizer data from Israel not supporting that it reduces transmission?

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...9ac_story.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've got a snooker cue, some golf clubs, and an unused season ticket they can have, no use to me :(

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/stanley-j...UWUTQSLSisQpL5

Re: Coronavirus
 

"Nice one, son."
S.J., Winsford, Somerset
;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wonder if glancing in the estate agents window on your way to the beach counts?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Didn't Whitty advise AGAINST an early lockdown?

If that was the scientific advice, then you cannot correctly blame the government for getting it wrong. Whitty said:

"...if we go too early, people will understandably get fatigued and it will be difficult to sustain this over time".

Wasn't it the World Health Organisation that was advising against closing the borders because "evidence shows that restricting the movement of people and goods during public health emergencies is ineffective in most situations and may divert resources from other interventions"?

The government had a lot to weigh up in those early days and was receiving conflicting advice due to the many unknowns, not to mention fears for the economy. Blaming the government for anything that went wrong is a cheap shot.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Absolute nonsense Old Boy, anything to deflect from the idea the Government made mistakes. One year on, same old OB.

What Whitty’s public statements on early/later lockdown were made are irrelevant. He’s not going to go out and publicly say something against Government policy. By that point the decisions have been made and lines agreed, unless he fancies resigning.

Pointing to discredited WHO advice is a red herring and by mid-March many other countries were going against it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Millions of elderly? Even Professor Pantsdown wasn’t that much of a doom-monger.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

The simple answer is 'sort of/maybe' at this point. What is known is that the Pfizer vaccine reduces symptomatic and, importantly, asymptomatic infections. There also seems to be some good evidence coming out that the virus is cleared more quickly in infected vaccinated people.

If you think about how you get infected with SARS-COV2, you need to get close enough to someone who is shedding virus and breathe in virus particles in a high enough dose. Symptomatic people are a huge issue and they will coughing away and shedding a lot more virus in to the air so not only is virus coming out, it's getting forced out at speed (evolution is great!) BUT, at this stage, if you are symptomatic, in all likelihood you are going to think 'Uh oh, COVID' and isolate and get tested. Also, masks will help catch the droplets being sprayed out by a symptomatic person.

Logically, an asymptomatic person will be less infectious as they aren't coughing but the evidence is weak right now on how much less infectious they are. Kids are more likely to be asymptomatic, hence the in school testing going on right now (I have a big stack of test kit boxes on my dining room table right now for home testing of the kids) Te downside of asymptomatic people is that they are not isolating - they are merrily going about their way shedding virus. What we need to know is what the 'R' value is for an asymptomatic person and that isn't clear right now.

So, vaccines seem to reduce the numbers of people actively spreading SARS-COV2 by coughing and the numbers of people unwittingly spreading infection and the infective period seems less so, in all likelihood, vaccines will reduce transmission as there are less people spreading the virus. What is less clear is how infectious you are if you are vaccinated but infected. This is one of the reasons why the Government is asking vaccinated people to not go crazy (there are other behavioural reasons too of course)

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had my Oxford AstraZenecia jab on Monday morning.


I woke up on Tuesday feeling like I had a cold, and just rundown, my Brother in-law had his just before me, but he felt like crap.


This morning we are both getting back to normal, and one step closer to family hugs.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had my 2nd Pfizer Vaccination 8am yesterday morning. Arm painful overnight and still tender this morning but other than that I feel fine.

At last I can add the 2nd jab to my Covid Symptons Study app. Worth having a look at the results of the study if you haven't come across it before.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/

Re: Coronavirus
 

EU is getting a bit paranoid.
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Same old argumentative jfman.

It is a fact that Whitty said that, and if you remember, the government has always said that they were following scientific advice.

The WHO advice may have been discredited subsequently (if you say so) but the fact is, that’s the medical advice that was there.

Government decisions? Yes. Medical advice at the time? Yes.

What other countries were doing, frankly, is irrelevant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Better keep an eye on the Belgian border to see if the krauts are amassing troops /panzer divisions:)

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not being argumentative I’m simply pointing out you are contributing palpable nonsense. Did the Government ignore SAGE advice to lockdown around 11th March? Yes. Did they ignore similar in September? Yes.

You’re quoting one man on Government payroll and giving that greater weight than the scientific advisory groups the Government appointed to give advice. Ministers make decisions based on (or against) that advice at their own discretion.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Commando comics called - could they have their out-dated language back, please? :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nein, but you can have this pineapple, Fritz.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Amusingly, they are now printed by GGP Media in Germany - Karl-Marx-Straße in Pößneck... :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Next it'll be cabbage crates over the briny.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wing Commander: I want you to lay down your life, Papa. We need a futile gesture at this stage. It will raise the whole tone of the war. Get up in a crate, Papa, pop over to Bremen, take a shufti, don't come back. Goodbye Papa. God, I wish I was going too.

Papa: Goodbye sir - or is it “au revoir"?

Wing Commander: No, Papa...

(thank you, Peter Cook)

Re: Coronavirus
 

This looks like a thoroughly meaningless statement.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-5...ost_type=share

But I thought the EU’s complaint was the commercial terms of a contract they signed with a private company? And that the new export control measures were not aimed at any particular country (despite the terms of control being a suspiciously accurate description of the UK’s status re vaccines)? Why then are they now seeking a “reciprocally beneficial relationship” with HMG? Are they finally going to admit that they royally fecked up their whole vaccine plan and they need our help to fix it?

Re: Coronavirus
 

It didn't take our "EU friends" long to revert back to being the old enemy :(

Re: Coronavirus
 

The medical establishment has been looking in different directions on this, and Whitty advised as he advised. His arguments were the ones taken into account.

SAGE may have thought differently at another point in time, but there were many other factors that had to be taken into account, and not all of them were medical issues. You are over-simplifying this to an extraordinary level to try and win your unfounded argument. But to try to paint a picture that the government was not listening to medical and other professional advice is just fanciful.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hopefully Boris has been busy on the phone pointing out that the EU risks serious long-term difficulties in its vaccine supplies for the short term domestic PR gain of blocking movement of vaccines or components from the EU to the UK. We are cooking a lot of vaccine here, we have a lot more influence over the other major source of the AZ vaccine (India) than the EU does, and we’re not just making AZ here in the UK. Around a third of Valneva’s manufacturing capacity is now in Scotland. A rather important component of the Pfizer vaccine is made in East Yorkshire. If the EU were to try to start a vaccine war it would be a self defeating move.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Rubbish Old Boy. The Government ignored advice on lockdowns 1 and 2. These are matters of public record.

What is fanciful is the idea that the Chief Medical Officer, or Chief Scientific Adviser, could or would go public and make statements that actively contradict Government policy as agreed by Ministers.

You are greatly over-complicating the situation to allow yourself to claim that the Government have been blameless at all times. Over lockdowns, PPE, billions for Dido Harding’s non-functioning contract tracing... always someone else to blame.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Neither of us has much influence over it at the moment!
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-...eneca-23789417

---------- Post added at 19:18 ---------- Previous post was at 19:07 ----------

Well handled

• Press conferences with medical experts
• Vaccination procurement
• Vaccination pre-procurement and onshoring
• Vaccination roll-out

Badly handled

• Test and trace
• Late lockdowns
• Christmas situation
• PPE procurement
• Discharge of infected patients into nursing homes
• NHS pay rise
• Dominic Cummings fiasco
• Not limiting inbound travel from overseas until fairly recently

I think Boris's performance is improving whilst some other leaders are worsening, eg Angela Merkel and her last-minute Easter extension which the country revolted against.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think the government has been careful in its decision making. With hindsight, different decisions could have been made at times, but you could say that of other governments over the world.

This was a unique situation and we were dealing with the unknown. It’s all very well slagging off the government no matter what it does from the comfort of your own armchair, but I shudder to think about what a pig’s ear the other lot would have made of it. Captain Hindsight would have been facing the wrong direction throughout. Corbyn would have consulted Hamas.

At least this government has been decisive, and they have certainly come up trumps with vaccine procurement and the subsequent action to ensure prompt vaccination of the population.

Meanwhile, EU deaths are set to escalate with the start of a new wave that their population is fully exposed to.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

More tosh Old Boy.

Surely the EU can just "shield the vulnerable"? :dunce:

I see you've at least dropped that ludicrous tagline from beneath your user name.

The fact other governments could have made better decisions is neither here nor there to your original claim that I debunked - as I say it's a matter of public record - that they ignored SAGE advice on both lockdowns and this had a catastrophic impact modelled as tens of thousands of deaths.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed

I don’t think they are at fault for the lockdowns except perhaps for not locking down
London along with the rest of the country.

if you are referring to the above London situation - agreed. Otherwise don’t know what you mean.

considering it was a global issue they did alright.

Agreed

considering the hardships many of the citizens of the nation have suffered I think the NHS should have shut the flup up.

blown out of all proportion by the MSM, he probably should have resigned though.

there have been restrictions on inbound travel since the pandemic started.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So SAGE become the Government. What a stupid uninformed point of view.

The Government have to take in advice from many areas, attempt to weigh the pro's and con's and proceed accordingly.

Don't forget the SAGE advice was based on modelling since shown inept at best.

The current models for unlocking are not based on seasonal changes or actual vaccine take up so how can they be trusted?

Cases reducing, hospitalisation reducing, deaths reducing P-leasssse.

It has still yet to be proven that lockdowns actually work, they may in the short term to reduce pressure on hospitals but do they work overall?

Many people look to the far east to prove the effectivence of lockdowns/mask wearing without factoring in societal differences.

New Zealand is often brought up as an example but far easier to control the spread than any other 1st world country.

As Society is responsible for everything it does for and on behalf of itself why should any Government need to legislate what that society does?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Define what works means in this context? They clearly work in reducing pressure on hospitals as you say and they work in reducing transmission, cases and deaths as well.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Lockdowns work overall - of course they do. It just depends what your “overall” is. The overall aim of a lockdown is to get transmission low enough for hospitals and the economy to function. The overall aim is not to eliminate covid from the population, regardless of what anyone says (Nicola Sturgeon liked to suggest she had a zero covid strategy in the early days ... she has quietly dropped that now). For quite some time now it has been acknowledged that a vaccine is the only actual exit route from the disruption to our lives.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My context is clear, you added "and" on as well. Now you have to show 12 months on where transmission and deaths has been reduced. Cases I have ignored as these could include asymptomaic or false positives. You got to love the Government for highlighting "cases" rather those who are actually suffering from it.
Helps SAGE with their scaremongering.

---------- Post added at 23:02 ---------- Previous post was at 23:00 ----------

I'm sorry Chris, but I disagree and the answer will only come out afterwards. It only delayed the spread rightly to reduce NHS pressure.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Shielding the vulnerable was perfectly sensible before we had the vaccine, because without that all we could do was slow it down.

As I said, there were other aspects over and above the Sage advice that needed to be taken account of. The government listened to ALL the arguments. Taking a different decision does not necessarily mean you ignored the advice. It was not taken for the reasons we will hear about when the review is forthcoming.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You mean that review in at least 5yrs or do we have to wait for lockdown to end in 10 before it starts?

Re: Coronavirus
 

To those of you wondering about the Zoe app Maggy posted earlier (perhaps not this tread) here's more info.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No worse than your ability to read, evidently.

Indeed, it’s Government responsibility for the outcomes as I was stating to Old Boy. The Government tried to drag the “three week” lockdown to the Easter holidays as it’d have less economic impact. Not Whitty, not SAGE...

Has it?

Ah the “societal differences” trope.

As for your final point why have a speed limit? Require seatbelts? There’s a whole swathe of activity Governments don’t trust individuals with.

---------- Post added at 06:47 ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 ----------

So European folk aren’t at risk despite a stalling vaccine rollout? It can only be one or the other, OB.

I eagerly await the review. The trailers for the bold Dom’s evidence have been good so far.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not me gov,unless the covid vaccination has affected my memory.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was joglynne (I’ve been taking part too, along with 4.6 million others)

Re: Coronavirus
 

The experience from the Spanish Flu says yes, lockdowns work - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/h...ic-coronavirus (more formal study here - https://www.pnas.org/content/104/18/7582 )

On your second comment, it falls down when public health is involved unless society provides its' own healthcare service. It's governments role to keep us safe. It's why we have the police, army, etc. If suggesting and asking nicely to act safely doesn't work, then governments legislate. It's why we have speed limits. As I have said before, we in the UK are 'soft' when it comes to healthcare as we know that the NHS will always be there if we mess up. If that safety net weren't present, people would be a lot more careful!

Libertariansim like communism is a nice idea on paper but doesn't work in the real world.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ahhh, how right you are.

Sorry Maggy.