Barryd999 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 It does seem that the UK has done well so far securing and rolling out the vaccines. Well the Vaccine producers and the NHS have. However lets not ignore the Elephant in the room. The fact that we have over 100000 dead, the worst death toll in Europe and pretty much the highest death rate in the world. Stable door and all that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-01-27 4:34 PM It does seem that the UK has done well so far securing and rolling out the vaccines. Well the Vaccine producers and the NHS have. However lets not ignore the Elephant in the room. The fact that we have over 100000 dead, the worst death toll in Europe and pretty much the highest death rate in the world. Stable door and all that! That depends if it's going to come at the cost of Johnsons decision to ignore the manufacturers recommendations of dosage periods by increasing the follow up jab from one to three months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 mtravel - 2021-01-27 4:20 PM jumpstart - 2021-01-27 4:59 PM ... Sounds like you are all blah,blah,blah....EU don't seem to be particularly well managed about anything .... Happy you, happy me. We will talk about everything in a few years. I remember when at the beginning of the pandemic you made malicious and patronizing comparisons with my country. Now you see your results ... You are mistaking malicious for critical and patronising.. well you are well ahead there The result is we are further in to vaccination than the EU. I suppose you get what you pay for.....or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtravel Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 What I see from some is the continuing tendency to compare the post-Brexit UK with the EU. I wonder what sense it makes. You have gone out, think of yourself and not of the Community. A good psychologist could perhaps tie it to a fear of the future and an attempt to secure certainties by telling themselves that it is worse outside. Am I wrong? As for the Oxford vaccine, I remember that many factories and logistics are within the EU and since the manufacturer seems not respecting the agreements signed, the Community is thinking of verifying the destination of supplies when it is to "third party countries". At least so we read in newspapers and see on TV. You know what "third party countries" means, let us see how it evolves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 mtravel - 2021-01-27 5:08 PM What I see from some is the continuing tendency to compare the post-Brexit UK with the EU. I wonder what sense it makes. You have gone out, think of yourself and not of the Community. A good psychologist could perhaps tie it to a fear of the future and an attempt to secure certainties by telling themselves that it is worse outside. Am I wrong? As for the Oxford vaccine, I remember that many factories and logistics are within the EU and since the manufacturer seems not respecting the agreements signed, the Community is thinking of verifying the destination of supplies when it is to "third party countries". At least so we read in newspapers and see on TV. You know what "third party countries" means, let us see how it evolves. If you read the news a little more thoroughly you will see that the UK placed their order 3 months before the EU could make up its mind. Its a simple thing called a contract,which i think the EU still abides by...unless im wrong and its a free for all..... It certainly might end up a free for all as i see Spain has announced it is running out of vaccine...... How long will the EU keep it all together i wonder.....mmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-01-27 3:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2021-01-27 1:07 PM pelmetman - 2021-01-27 9:15 AM ..................................Its become clear that the EU's penny pinching over the contract is the reason for them being at the back of the queue ;-) ............ Who's fault is that? ..............THE EU >:-) .......... The EMA exists to use its buying power to negotiate deals on behalf of the member states, to prevent a bidding free for all among the states, and to ensure that approved products are safe to use in, and available in, all member states. It works through committees of the 27 member states and is therefore bureaucratic. Consequently, they were slow to order, and slow to approve, Covid vaccines. As the urgency of developing a vaccine against Covid has proved, that is its Achilles' heel. However, it is nevertheless credited with working faster than the American FDA. This is embarrassing for the member states individual medical authorities - especially as the UK, by using the permitted parallel route to national approval, and by working through parallel approval paths, has approved and ordered the vaccines faster, which is why the row has blown up. People are dying while the EMA debates. That is no great cause for jubilation, I think. 8-) In parallel with the EMA any state with competence could have done what the UK did, using the same provisions the UK used (while still subject to EU regulation) to do so. They did not. Their decisions: that is why they are embarrassed. If you want to know why, you have to ask the individual states. Good luck with that! :-D The EMA was originally sited in Canary Wharf, London, in 1995. Following the Brexit vote, it is now in Amsterdam. What impact that move has had on its speed of response is unclear - at least to me. That seems the only area where Brexit may have had a role. This is from the EMA website: "While the majority of new, innovative medicines are evaluated by EMA and authorised by the European Commission in order to be marketed in the EU, most generic medicines and medicines available without a prescription are assessed and authorised at national level in the EU. In addition, many older medicines available today were authorised at national level because they were marketed before EMA was created. Most Member States maintain National registers of authorised medicines. Each EU Member State has its own national authorisation procedures. Information about these can normally be found on the websites of the national competent authorities: National competent authorities (human) National competent authorities (veterinary) If a company wishes to request marketing authorisation in several EU Member States for a medicine that is outside the scope of the centralised procedure, it may use one of the following routes: mutual-recognition procedure, whereby a marketing authorisation granted in one Member State can be recognised in other EU countries; decentralised procedure, whereby a medicine that has not yet been authorised in the EU can be simultaneously authorised in several EU Member States. You really had not the faintest what you voted for, why, or what benefits might follow. :-S What Blah Blah Brian is trying to say is ;-) ......... The EU F*cked Up and Boris didn't (lol) (lol) (lol) ............. No Dave, what I'm saying is that your original post above was misleading crap. If you'd read what I said, you'd know that. Don't bother replying! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 Produced in the UK. The Guardian: Britain and EU clash over claims to UK-produced Covid vaccine. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/27/eu-covid-vaccine-row-astrazeneca-european-commission Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 jumpstart - 2021-01-27 8:50 PM Produced in the UK. The Guardian: Britain and EU clash over claims to UK-produced Covid vaccine. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/27/eu-covid-vaccine-row-astrazeneca-european-commission Except it sounds like only half of it is produced in the UK. As the article suggests this could get nasty and no country wants to be frozen out of one of the two main vaccines that are currently being rolled out as quickly as possible. I guess it will depend on whats written in the contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted January 27, 2021 Share Posted January 27, 2021 jumpstart - 2021-01-27 8:50 PM Produced in the UK. The Guardian: Britain and EU clash over claims to UK-produced Covid vaccine. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/27/eu-covid-vaccine-row-astrazeneca-european-commission From the article, some are made in the EU some in the UK "The EU wants to ensure that doses made in AstraZeneca’s plants in Belgium and the Netherlands are not in future sent to the UK. There is also the risk that exports of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from European plants could be blocked from reaching the UK, although the commission has sought to assuage those fears. “People in the United Kingdom are vaccinated with a very good vaccine produced in Europe, supported by European money,” said Peter Liese, a German MEP in Angela Merkel’s CDU party, referring to the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 More on the way... https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-manufacturing-covid-vaccine-valneva-b906243.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebishbus Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 I presume a lot of this so called Eu money spent on vaccine development last year was actually UK money. Brian B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpstart Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 And more ..... https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/213313/imperial-vaccine-tech-target-covid-mutations/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 thebishbus - 2021-01-28 7:54 AM I presume a lot of this so called Eu money spent on vaccine development last year was actually UK money. Brian B. You won. Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-01-28 8:01 AM thebishbus - 2021-01-28 7:54 AM I presume a lot of this so called Eu money spent on vaccine development last year was actually UK money. Brian B. You won. Get over it. You Lost ......Get over it (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-01-27 4:34 PM However lets not ignore the Elephant in the room. The fact that we have over 100000 dead, the worst death toll in Europe and pretty much the highest death rate in the world. Stable door and all that! "Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter from Cambridge University has said trying to rank different countries to decide which is the worst in Europe is a "completely fatuous exercise"." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014 FATuous..........I couldn't describe you LOSERS better (lol) (lol) (lol) ............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-01-27 5:55 PM pelmetman - 2021-01-27 3:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2021-01-27 1:07 PM pelmetman - 2021-01-27 9:15 AM ..................................Its become clear that the EU's penny pinching over the contract is the reason for them being at the back of the queue ;-) ............ Who's fault is that? ..............THE EU >:-) .......... The EMA exists to use its buying power to negotiate deals on behalf of the member states, to prevent a bidding free for all among the states, and to ensure that approved products are safe to use in, and available in, all member states. It works through committees of the 27 member states and is therefore bureaucratic. Consequently, they were slow to order, and slow to approve, Covid vaccines. As the urgency of developing a vaccine against Covid has proved, that is its Achilles' heel. However, it is nevertheless credited with working faster than the American FDA. This is embarrassing for the member states individual medical authorities - especially as the UK, by using the permitted parallel route to national approval, and by working through parallel approval paths, has approved and ordered the vaccines faster, which is why the row has blown up. People are dying while the EMA debates. That is no great cause for jubilation, I think. 8-) In parallel with the EMA any state with competence could have done what the UK did, using the same provisions the UK used (while still subject to EU regulation) to do so. They did not. Their decisions: that is why they are embarrassed. If you want to know why, you have to ask the individual states. Good luck with that! :-D The EMA was originally sited in Canary Wharf, London, in 1995. Following the Brexit vote, it is now in Amsterdam. What impact that move has had on its speed of response is unclear - at least to me. That seems the only area where Brexit may have had a role. This is from the EMA website: "While the majority of new, innovative medicines are evaluated by EMA and authorised by the European Commission in order to be marketed in the EU, most generic medicines and medicines available without a prescription are assessed and authorised at national level in the EU. In addition, many older medicines available today were authorised at national level because they were marketed before EMA was created. Most Member States maintain National registers of authorised medicines. Each EU Member State has its own national authorisation procedures. Information about these can normally be found on the websites of the national competent authorities: National competent authorities (human) National competent authorities (veterinary) If a company wishes to request marketing authorisation in several EU Member States for a medicine that is outside the scope of the centralised procedure, it may use one of the following routes: mutual-recognition procedure, whereby a marketing authorisation granted in one Member State can be recognised in other EU countries; decentralised procedure, whereby a medicine that has not yet been authorised in the EU can be simultaneously authorised in several EU Member States. You really had not the faintest what you voted for, why, or what benefits might follow. :-S What Blah Blah Brian is trying to say is ;-) ......... The EU F*cked Up and Boris didn't (lol) (lol) (lol) ............. No Dave, what I'm saying is that your original post above was misleading crap. If you'd read what I said, you'd know that. Don't bother replying! Rubbish *-) .......... FACT........The EU signed their contract 3 months after the UK to save a few Shekels 8-) ........ FACT........They are now at the back of the queue ;-) .......... FACT........They are now trying to blame anyone but themselves for THEIR INCOMPETENCE >:-) ......... FACT.........You LOSERS don't like it up EU (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-01-28 8:45 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-01-28 8:01 AM thebishbus - 2021-01-28 7:54 AM I presume a lot of this so called Eu money spent on vaccine development last year was actually UK money. Brian B. You won. Get over it. You Lost ......Get over it (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... I note you have studiously avoided commenting on the Brexit success thread aka "what time will" So as you have lied to us all about not writing on CB after the 1st of January, and I know lying comes easy to those of you of the leave persuasion, care to share your thoughts on all this winning you're doing? You could start a new thread and update it hourly just like in the old days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-01-28 8:48 AM Barryd999 - 2021-01-27 4:34 PM However lets not ignore the Elephant in the room. The fact that we have over 100000 dead, the worst death toll in Europe and pretty much the highest death rate in the world. Stable door and all that! "Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter from Cambridge University has said trying to rank different countries to decide which is the worst in Europe is a "completely fatuous exercise"." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014 FATuous..........I couldn't describe you LOSERS better (lol) (lol) (lol) ............ Who cares what he says? Our figures are absolutely attrocious even if they are a few differences in how countries work them out. He also says "But he's also referred to "the bad countries in Europe: UK, Belgium, France, Spain, Italy" and he also says "First of all, there are differences in how countries record Covid-19 deaths. France and Germany, for example, have been including deaths in care homes in the headline numbers they produce every day. But the daily figures for England referred only to deaths in hospitals until 29 April, when they started factoring in deaths in care homes as well." So our appalling figure could actually be much higher!! When are you going to stop defending Johnson and his government. They have failed us, big time. The only saving grace has been the vaccine in all of this, here we have done well but of course the Government had nothing to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 "Dear Readers. Medical certificates in England (a.k.a. "Death certificates") have four lines on them for 'Cause of Death'. 1 a, b, and c which are the direct cause of death, and 2 which lists conditions contributing to the death, but not necessarily causing it. For example, for someone admitted to hospital with Covid-19 who started to recover from it, but developed venous thromboembolic complications and died, the certificate could read: 1a Pulmonary Embolism 1b Deep Vein thrombosis 1c (or even 2) Covid-19. The patient didn't die directly from Covid-19, but it led directly to them dying. There is no section on the medical certificate to list all their illnesses. UK doctors are not paid extra to complete this certificate. And there is no incentive to add Covid-19 for any reason if a doctor does not think it did not contribute towards death. I should also add that around 250 people die every year from accidents involving buses. There is no indication that this figure increased in 2020. So, to everyone stating that the 100,000 death figure is 'people who died WITH Covid rather than of Covid' or 'You could be run over by a bus and they'd put Covid as the cause of death'... Just feck off. You're as welcome as "All lives matter" or "I'm not racist but...". You are apologists for a Government that is incompetent and mendacious in explaining its incompetence. Feel free to quote the D***y M**l or some statistics you watched on Youtube. Feel free to join the dwindling number of pariahs who think this kind of bull-s**t is acceptable. I won't be listening." Dr Rant on Facebook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 mtravel - 2021-01-27 11:56 AM ......................................... The speed of vaccination also depends on how it is done. There are countries that have adopted some vaccines before the manufacturers have provided all the documentation necessary for approval and countries that have preferred to act in a hurry. There are countries that respect the indications of the manufacturers that prescribe a certain number of weeks between the first and second inoculation and countries that multiply it by a factor of even four. Which ones make you more confident ?............................. Confident of what, though, Massimo? Confident that you or I might gain the greatest individual benefit, or confident that the greatest number will gain the greatest collective benefit? If benefit for the individual is prioritised, a smaller number of people can be vaccinated, while those who do not receive the vaccine are left open to infection and hospitalisation (so denying others hospital access and treatment) and/or death. So, the individuals gain optimal protection, but more people overall become ill and die. If, on the other hand, the benefit to the greatest number is prioritised, then each individual benefits from a high proportion of protection from the virus, while those awaiting vaccination benefit from a more rapidly reducing pool of infection (so diminishing their risk) and reduced hospital admissions (so greater hospital access for non-Covid illnesses). So, all wait longer for optimal protection, but all also benefit from better access to hospitals and reduced infections and deaths. It is an unenviable calculation to have to make, but I think achieving the greatest good, for the greatest number, in the shortest time, is the correct priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Barryd999 - 2021-01-28 10:50 AM So our appalling figure could actually be much higher!! Must be because it ignores those who died for lack of medical treatment because the nhs was occupied with covid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-01-28 8:53 AM.................................. Rubbish *-) .......... FACT 1........The EU signed their contract 3 months after the UK to save a few Shekels 8-) ........ FACT 2........They are now at the back of the queue ;-) .......... FACT 3........They are now trying to blame anyone but themselves for THEIR INCOMPETENCE >:-) ......... FACT 4.........You LOSERS don't like it up EU (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... 1 Is not a fact. Yes, they signed three months later than the UK. However, the reason for that delay being that they prioritised money over speed, unless you have corroborating evidence, is mere assertion. You forgot to add that the EU has only approved two vaccines to date, with a total of 670 million doses ordered. 2 Is a fact, as I said in my original post that you didn't read. 3 Is also a fact, as I said in my original post that you didn't read. 4 Is merely your confirmation bias, and is irrelevant. In terms of the UK government's performance over ordering, and distributing, the vaccine, they have played a blinder. Sadly, it is the only blinder they have played. Their earlier delays, indecisions, and premature relaxations have led us in the unenviable position of having the vaccines administered in a sub-optimal, rather than optimal, way. Taking comfort from someone else having been bigger fools than our own government isn't much of an endorsement though, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 thebishbus - 2021-01-28 7:54 AM I presume a lot of this so called Eu money spent on vaccine development last year was actually UK money. Brian B. That and all the other things we are still paying for, but won't benefit from because we chose to leave. So BoJo could take back control for himself .. and manage things better than the EU *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebishbus Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 I thought that the EU were hinting that we were benefiting at their expense. Regarding total annual death rates this is interesting as a comparison . Total annual death rates in England and Wales over the last few years in thousands.. 2020--- 578,691. 2019----530,841. 2018---541,589. 2017--- 533,253. 2016---525,655. 2015---602,72. Brian B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-01-28 1:28 PM pelmetman - 2021-01-28 8:53 AM.................................. Rubbish *-) .......... FACT 1........The EU signed their contract 3 months after the UK to save a few Shekels 8-) ........ FACT 2........They are now at the back of the queue ;-) .......... FACT 3........They are now trying to blame anyone but themselves for THEIR INCOMPETENCE >:-) ......... FACT 4.........You LOSERS don't like it up EU (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... In terms of the UK government's performance over ordering, and distributing, the vaccine, they have played a blinder. Sadly, it is the only blinder they have played. Their earlier delays, indecisions, and premature relaxations have led us in the unenviable position of having the vaccines administered in a sub-optimal, rather than optimal, way. Taking comfort from someone else having been bigger fools than our own government isn't much of an endorsement though, is it? If government have over ordered vaccine supplies, why would Johnson find it necessary to increase the time gap to the second jab from one month to three months against manufacturers instructions? As for the row between EU and AstraZeneca, EU has poured billions into funding medical research in UK which we've now lost but that apart, what is important is the contract the EU signed with Astra which they appear not to have fully committed to. I read where Astra claim they only agreed to supply the EU from Astras manufacturing plant//s within the EU and not from it's UK plant. The EU dispute this and say that was not in the contract. If we're not careful I can see this developing into a legal row and at this point I doubt it's in our favour but a stupid road to go down anyway. We are relying on continuing to trade with the EU, not just for vaccine, but we do need more supplies of BioNTech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.