It's not a fact, and even if it was it'd be considered an acceptable toll by the population at large.
As I've said on a number of occasions we go into lockdowns because the same principles apply as last February/March. The only thing that changes this is mitigation to control the spread of the virus.
Interesting to use "extremely small sample size" to discount scientific evidence as unworthy of further discussion or investigation.
As I said before if you avoid the British press and the posionous drum of nationalism being played you can find some good quality, independent thought. Fundamentally the WHO don't think the vaccine is dangerous which is why they recommend it's use. They offer no opinion on it's ability to prevent severe cases of the newer variants.
---------- Post added at 09:47 ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy
There you have it in a nutshell: Unity of the EU is more important than the lives of its citizens.
|
That's not really what she's saying. Imagine a bidding war where London and the south east drove up the prices (and bought all the supply of) vaccines to the UK leaving Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the North or England to fend for themselves at the back of the queue?
It'd be preposterous and the same principles applied to the EU - a situation where rich, northern European nations bought up the first doses leaving the rest at the back of th queue would be untenable.
There's no guarantee the EU states working seperately would have got more vaccines - only that they'd be unequally distributed and (in economic theory at least) cost more.