Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I lived in Paris for two years.

My wife went to register for her social insurance health card. We were literally the only people in the offices aside from four staff. When we explained what we were there for they told us that they don't do that in the afternoon and to come back on a morning. Nobody else there.

So the below doesn't surprise me in the least.




The Franco-Austrian Valneva - based near Nantes - has had substantial UK government financial aid of £14m to scale up its production site at Livingston in Scotland.

It also had UK help to roll out phase one and two trials of its viral vector vaccine. Results of these are due in the coming weeks and it’s hoped production could start in late summer.

Valneva director general Franck Grimaud said on BFMTV: "When we announced that we were developing our vaccine last April, we contacted several governments and institutions. It was the UK which was the first to give a comprehensive response, and we signed a pre-accord with them in July."

"It’s a failure for France. It hurts to see this beautiful business taking off for the UK," says Christelle Morancais, president of the Pays de la Loire region, who says she alerted the French government last June. "This company had solutions. [French President Emmanuel] Macron says we are at war - well in war you need different methods from our bureaucratic, technocratic form-filling."

Les Echos financial daily says: "Why has the French government not expressed interest in the Valneva project, leaving it to the British government to offer financial support and - logically therefore - reap the benefits a privileged partner?"
 
Dangerous term. Vast majority of vaccination effectiveness from first dose, it's hard to argue the UK have probably got the right idea by spacing them out, especially after the latest AZ research. Educated risk is a thing; the UK method from the AZ vaccine alone will probably save thousands of lives compared to if we hadn't done it.

There's no point in trying to spin the vaccine story - the UK has nailed it, the EU didn't.

“Dangerous term”?

Do me a favour, or better yet tell us which vaccines for COVID have been approved in the UK that are single dose. You might also at least acknowledge in that post that Pfizer haven’t backed what we are doing with their drug, which we’ve given to the most vulnerable.
 
“Dangerous term”?

Do me a favour, or better yet tell us which vaccines for COVID have been approved in the UK that are single dose. You might also at least acknowledge in that post that Pfizer haven’t backed what we are doing with their drug, which we’ve given to the most vulnerable.

It's dangerous because its suggesting there's no actual vaccination benefit until the second dose, when they're "actually" vaccinated.

That is untrue. The second shot is a "booster" which prolongs the effect - studies are now indicating for AZ that the vaccine acts as fully intended for 12 weeks after the first shot.
 
It's dangerous because its suggesting there's no actual vaccination benefit until the second dose, when they're "actually" vaccinated.

That is untrue. The second shot is a "booster" which prolongs the effect - studies are now indicating for AZ that the vaccine acts as fully intended for 12 weeks after the first shot.

I wasn’t suggesting anything of the kind - just pointing out that we (and the EU, and every other organisation that’s approved these two) have done so on the basis that two doses must be given on a specific timescale.

We aren’t doing that (edit), for one of these vaccines- for reasons that appear to me rather morally dubious.
 
I would think Sputnik V will not be used in the U.K. , nor will Sinopharm from China. The EU can use whatever they want. Germany will be quietly buying up its own supplies of whatever it wants, having driven the 27 to let the EU sort them out previously. Hungary is buying the Russian and Chinese vaccines, and you can see why they are, and why Macron is in the crap.....

View attachment 116488

That’s actually quite good, take Ireland we are running the two dose strategy, if we were running one dose we’d have double the amount of people, so we’d be up close to 9 considering we’ve only had two vaccines until next week, we’re doing well and the U.K. had a few weeks of a head start!

The comparative figures will flatline and grow closer eventually when the UK start second dosing the majority. I saw yesterday figures were the U.K. was behimd most of Europe for second doses. Figures can be easily non reflective, depending on the premise.


I think a bit to much is being made of roll out success and failure to be honest.

We will have half our population fully vaccinated by the end of June, the U.K. are aiming for everyone to have a first dose by then, it’s in and around the same thing really, just a slight of hand.

Half our population will be fully protected, the whole of the U.K. population will have a measure of protection. Which is better depends on your outlook.

The good news is everyone seems to be getting enough vaccine presently!
 
Interesting report on what the NHS Health chief said to the Parliaamntary Committee last week - which looks like a rowing back on the 12 week gap between 1st and 2nd jabs.


Patients due their second Covid vaccine dose will be prioritised for existing supply within the 12-week window, NHS England’s chief executive has pledged.

Sir Simon Stevens’ comments, made in a parliamentary hearing on Tuesday, come as the Government last week refused to guarantee that patients would receive their second dose within the timeframe.

This comes amid growing tensions with medical professionals regarding the UK chief medical officers’ decision to lengthen the interval between first and second doses from the three weeks prescribed by vaccine manufacturer Pfizer.

A number of GP vaccination sites were honouring second-dose appointments until NHS England said this was banned, and the BMA wrote to the Government last week about halving the gap between Pfizer vaccine doses to six weeks.

Giving evidence on Tuesday to the Health and Social Care and Science and Technology Committees, Sir Stevens was asked whether the ‘large numbers’ coming forward for their second dose from March was expected to slow down the rollout of first vaccine doses in priority cohorts five to nine.

To which he answered: ‘First and foremost those second doses have got to be delivered. So we look 12 weeks on from when the first doses were delivered and we know that that has to be first call on the vaccine available in those weeks.

‘Over and above that then, as we get increasing clarity as to what the available supply will be, that will shape the speed at which we can advance into those other groups.’

Sir Stevens further confirmed to the committees that the delay to second doses is due to a vaccine shortage.


He said: ‘Your key point was “is this being done because of a supply shortage?” and the answer to that is of course “yes, there is a supply shortage”.

‘We have done very well in this country to get the supply we have available to us. The question is how do we use it to best effect.’

Meanwhile, a new JCVI document, published on Tuesday, said that there is ‘strong evidence’ more deaths will be prevented by extending the gap between jabs to 12 weeks while there is limited vaccine supply.

But it added that it would be ‘worth starting to give second doses to the highest priority groups earlier than the 12-week deadline’ once first-dose vaccinations of the first three of four priority groups are complete.


Sir Stevens also told the parliamentary committees that GPs would be able to put in orders for how much vaccine they require once the time comes for second doses.

He said: ‘For the time being, we’re on this so-called ‘push’ model for fairness.

‘But for the second doses, we will be partly moving onto a so-called ‘pull’ model where the local services will be saying, “ I need this many vaccines next week for my second vaccinations” and then the vaccination team will make those vaccines available to them.’

GPs previously called for more vaccines to be delivered, saying they have capacity to administer much more than they are receiving.
 
"Virologist Julian Tang, of the University of Leicester, said E484K was thought to be “the main mutation impacting on vaccine efficacy”, adding that its emergence in different strains of the disease was “worrying”. Failure to control the circulation of the virus could lead to the UK becoming a “melting pot” for new mutations, he warned."

 
not being contrary here but I've seen plenty of people who are remain voters or definitely more left than right also bashing the BBC, and the other major channels. Both sides do it, that's my point.

I have this argument with my dad - who is older and yeah becoming a bit more conservative in his ways - all the time. If everyone's p***** off, then I reckon they're pretty impartial.

Papers and editors pick and choose their fighters. It's just how it works. People need to stop bloody chebbing about it like we live in Russia or Saudi Arabia. Not saying you're doing this, because I agree with you mate that there is a lot of elements that are biased, but as an entire entity, it's not.

BBC news presenters have to be impartial and neutral when it comes to matters like Brexit and elections, which is probably the reason why its my main goto for news online , Radio and via the TV.

A few years ago Murdoch and the othe papers were trying to force Cameron and Osborne to restrict and scale back the BBC's online presence as it was the number one website for news.

The narrative of the media has changed in the last decade and by the looks of things it will move further right. We now have an ex Tory councillor as head of the BBC and Johnson is about to appoint Paul Dacre to head up Ofcom, the former Daily Mail journalist and editor.
 
He'd be a journalist and doing his job if he didn't work for the Times.

He works for the Financial Times. Which also isn't behind a paywall as far as I can tell because I can read it just fine.

The journo in question has also been one of the best sources of information throughout this pandemic with his very detailed modelling and graphs.
 
BBC news presenters have to be impartial and neutral when it comes to matters like Brexit and elections, which is probably the reason why its my main goto for news online , Radio and via the TV.

A few years ago Murdoch and the othe papers were trying to force Cameron and Osborne to restrict and scale back the BBC's online presence as it was the number one website for news.

The narrative of the media has changed in the last decade and by the looks of things it will move further right. We now have an ex Tory councillor as head of the BBC and Johnson is about to appoint Paul Dacre to head up Ofcom, the former Daily Mail journalist and editor.

All I see is people crying if they don't like something and finding someone else to blame rather than looking at themselves.

Yes, you are right that if Murdoch and his cronies get hold of things like the BBC, then that's bad. I couldn't agree more. But I don't think they will.

Each individual journalist or presenter has a voice and can use that voice how they wish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top