Brexit, for once some facts.

[Zlatan]

You were asked this:

"can you find any quote where the EU rubbished the AZ vaccine?"

But you reply with what Macron said for France and Macron is not the EU. It's what you always do as I've so often pointed out, answer things that have never been said, so constructing a lie.
.

Your response simply highlights the ambiguity and stupidity of the EU system.
Its like saying the governor of New York state has nothing to do with USA.
Macron is most important person in 2nd largest Economy within EU but you insist he has nothing to do with EU. Beggers belief you do not see the irony in that.
What Macron says and does has massive influence over not only France but entire EU and probably the world. Him calling AZ vaccine Quasi effective was politically driven and probably motivated by France's own failed vaccine.
And, if Macron isn't part of or representing EU, exactly who is?
Perhaps the EU is just a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels?

 

[Jesus H Christ]

You were asked this:

"can you find any quote where the EU rubbished the AZ vaccine?"

But you reply with what Macron said for France and Macron is not the EU. It's what you always do as I've so often pointed out, answer things that have never been said, so constructing a lie.
.

It was me.

President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen’s remarks came amid growing concerns that unfavourable comments by top European officials including French President Emmanuel Macron had slowed take-up of one of only three vaccines currently approved EU-wide.

Earlier this month, Macron said Britain had taken a risk in authorising AstraZeneca so rapidly. A German official study also found evidence that, though effective, the vaccine has more severe side effects than its two main rivals.

Micron is a prominent EU official. Von-Trap has now had to do a reverse ferret and say she’d take it.

There is still an anti-AZ sentiment in existence in the EU and that’s because it’s rooted in the U.K. The same thing exists here, certain people aren’t of sufficient stature to admit that the U.K. has done something well.

 

[flecc]

Who do you see replacing Tories?

I have no idea or even if they will be replaced. I was posting about the direction the Daily Mail appears to be taking, my expressed opinion was only on that, not on whether they are right.
.

 

[Suzan]

I have no idea or even if they will be replaced. I was posting about the direction the Daily Mail appears to be taking, my expressed opinion was only on that, not on whether they are right.
.

That's odd. I must have mis read your post. I thought you, d said "the game was up for Tories".
After all, unfortunately, they have just increased their lead by 10 points over Starmer.

 

[Danidl]

The contract stated AZ would do it’s best to fulfil the order. They did do their best, but whilst the EU were kicking the tyres AZ were rolling out to the serious buyers.

The EU has ballsed up, end of. @wheeler

Nope!. That text, which you have misquoted related not to production, which was an AZ competence, but to whether the vaccine would meet regulatory compliance ,which was not within AZs competence to deliver, since the EMA was an independent third party body.
Putting it in entertainment terms, A cinema chain can contract Disney to produce a new version of " Puss in Boots ", and sue them if the cartoon is not available on the first Friday before Christmas., But cannot demand that it gets nominated for an Oscar.

 

[flecc]

And, if Macron isn't part of or representing EU, exactly who is?
Perhaps the EU is just a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels?

At last you are getting it, the EU is not a national government, it is indeed a bunch of European bureaucrats, namely the EU Commission, a body composed of one nominated person from each member country's government.

Their job is to work towards uniting all the member countries into one country of Europe, but unless and until that is achieved, the EU will only function in a variable and imperfect manner. If the target of a truly united Europe is ever achieved, the Commission disbands and the elected European Parliament takes over the running of the new country, becoming like the USA, a nation of largely self governing states with a federal government looking after national matters.

Some of us believe that is a good target to aim for so support the principle of the EU, but that doesn't mean we support the shortcomings, indeed I've often posted as such as you well know.
.

 

[Danidl]

Your response simply highlights the ambiguity and stupidity of the EU system.
Its like saying the governor of New York state has nothing to do with USA.
Macron is most important person in 2nd largest Economy within EU but you insist he has nothing to do with EU. Beggers belief you do not see the irony in that.
What Macron says and does has massive influence over not only France but entire EU and probably the world. Him calling AZ vaccine Quasi effective was politically driven and probably motivated by France's own failed vaccine.
And, if Macron isn't part of or representing EU, exactly who is?
Perhaps the EU is just a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels?

You are at least half right . Macron speaks for France, he doesn't speak for the EU. Merkel speaks for Germany. UVDL speaks for the EU not Germany. All have taken oaths to this effect. Macron is a major EU, European and world figure. Just as unfortunately A.Foster speaks for NI not the UK, or Sturgeon , unfortunately speaks only for Scotland and not the UK.
What EXACTLY did Macron say, as opposed to what a translator decided he said?
As I am constantly explaining, both Marcon and Merkel sit on the Board of EU ,and UVDL is the CEO. The Chair of the Board rotates at 6 month intervals.

 

[flecc]

That's odd. I must have mis read your post. I thought you, d said "the game was up for Tories".
After all, unfortunately, they have just increased their lead by 10 points over Starmer.

Please don't start being as dishonest as Zlatan, this is what I said:

"I see this as the proprietors realising that the game is going to be up"

That was an expression of how I read the proprietors opinion from the actions they were taking. Not my actions and not my opinion of what would trend. As you seem to be new to the forum and this thread you may not be aware that I am no fan of Starmer. It's quite the contrary as I don't approve of him at all following his unacceptable performance as DPP over a previous decade.
.

 

[Suzan]

Please don't start being as dishonest as Zlatan, this is what I said:

"I see this as the proprietors realising that the game is going to be up"

That was an expression of how I read the proprietors opinion from the actions they were taking. Not my actions and not my opinion of what would trend. As you seem to be new to the forum and this thread you may not be aware that I am no fan of Starmer. It's quite the contrary as I don't approve of him at all following his unacceptable performance as DPP over a previous decade.
.

I don't know why you are arguing. I asked a simple question about who you saw replacing the Tories,after you said "the game was up for Tories". What you and other posters have lied to each other about is irrelevant. I, ve attached a screenshot of your comment, clearly saying. Well read it.

 

[Jesus H Christ]

Nope!. That text, which you have misquoted related not to production, which was an AZ competence, but to whether the vaccine would meet regulatory compliance ,which was not within AZs competence to deliver, since the EMA was an independent third party body.
Putting it in entertainment terms, A cinema chain can contract Disney to produce a new version of " Puss in Boots ", and sue them if the cartoon is not available on the first Friday before Christmas., But cannot demand that it gets nominated for an Oscar.

This will follow exactly the same path as every other single thing we have disagreed upon.

Eventually, future events will show that you are wrong, you will realise that you are wrong and you won’t have the good grace to admit you are wrong. It’s a repetitive cycle and I’m bored with it.

 

[flecc]

I don't know why you are arguing. I asked a simple question about who you saw replacing the Tories,after you said "the game was up for Tories". What you and other posters have lied to each other about is irrelevant. I, ve attached a screenshot of your comment, clearly saying. Well read it.
View attachment 41046

Perhaps you are incapable of understanding English and the meaning of this sentence:

"I see this as the proprietors realising that the game is going to be up"

Or perhaps you are just Zlatan posting under a false identity.
.

 

[Suzan]

This site is very strange.
Nobody has criticised government and their structure in past more than I.
This morning UK has vaccinated 92,000 plus people. We are at a total of 28.57 per 100 head of population. Germany is at 6.8,France 6.0 and Ireland 7.2.
Even if we had gone down shorter delay route we would still be at roughly 15 per 100 head... There really is no comparison on Vaccine front with us and our European neighbours.
We have vaccinated at over x4 over Germany and we are still vaccinating faster.
How on earth can people knock that achievement.

 

[Suzan]

Perhaps you are incapable of understanding English and the meaning of this sentence:

"I see this as the proprietors realising that the game is going to be up"

Or perhaps you are just Zlatan posting under a false identity.
.

No, I am not, either Zlatan or capable of understanding this English.
You said the game was going to be up for Tories. Its there in black and white. But you chose to not include the word Tories in your subsequent posts. It doesn't matter. It was a simple question. Who do you see replacing Tories if the game was up for them.I asked a perfectly civil question and you denied saying "tories* and started an argument bringing in other people?????Why?? Its odd.
And, BTW, does Zlatan actually exist. Sounds made up to me.

 

[flecc]

How on earth can people knock that achievement.

Perhaps they aren't knocking the achievement, I for one have praised the speed and numbers vaccinated. But because I've criticised the downsides that exist, I'm accused of knocking it all which I clearly haven't.

Once again people not reading what is posted but imagining something different.
.

 

[Suzan]

Perhaps they aren't knocking the achievement, I for one have praised the speed and numbers vaccinated. But because I've criticised the downsides that exist, I'm accused of knocking it all which I clearly haven't.

Once again people not reading what is posted but imagining something different.
.

Like I imagined you said Tories perhaps?

 

[flecc]

No, I am not, either Zlatan or capable of understanding this English.

OK, you are not Zlatan but not capable of understanding this English, so I half agree with the above.

You said the game was going to be up for Tories.

No I did not, don't post misleading part extracts. I gave that as my reading of the proprietors reasons for changing their stance. Whether they are wise in that I've no idea, time will tell.

Who do you see replacing Tories if the game was up for them.

I have no opinion on that since i didn't pose the question in my post. Ask the Daily Mail since they are the ones appearing to be losing faith in the Tories. Again something I've posted a few times which you appear to be unaware of. I've voted Tory many more times than I've voted for Labour and I've never voted for any other party.
.

 

[flecc]

Like I imagined you said Tories perhaps?

You're being silly now.

How could I express the change in direction the proprietors of the Daily Mail appear to be taking politically without using the word?
.

 

[oldgroaner]

I think your error is in thinking the new regime is an enforced 12 week delay. It isn't.
The delay was 28 days initially, changed to 28 days plus up to a maximum of 12 weeks.
As roll out approaches end people would be vaccinated before the 12 week maximum delay was reached. (if they hadn't thought about dispensing order very well)
You are wrong. Both regimes vaccinate their last patient on same day. (If rate were lots higher delay would affect it but at rate we are vaccinating at, delay between jabs does not affect overall time)

Well, I still fail to see that, but then I could always be wrong.
However looking at the way that supplies of the vaccine are subject to production problems leading to delays, I suspect not.

 

[oldgroaner]

And going back to Flecc/OG about SAGE and health directors being lackeys..
If you said I think the delay is wrong for reasons given, well fine. It could be. But yo suggest they are controlled by Boris and influenced by political expediency destroys any credit in the argument.
Imagine the scenario. Boris tells Patrick Valance to find data to support 12 week delay and introduce a policy to carry it out. Surely the obvious question back would be "why".
"To make me popular and get a lead in opinion polls"
But what if it ruins roll out?
What about at 15 weeks and its not working?
Johnson might be lots of things but he knows full well he will be judged on roll out not now, not in even 10 weeks but when it's finished... Short term success would be as damaging for Johnson as it would be for vaccine.
Country is following delayed jab roll out because Chris Witty, Stephen Powys, Patrick Valance and Jonathon Tam think its the best way not because the government pay their wages. Its a silly conspiracy theory.

Unfortunately it isn't necessarily a silly conspiracy theory, when this government itself was founded by conspirators
Let me give you two examples of risking human lives for the sake of popularity
"Eat out to help out"
Great idea if you are an undertaker, or in the hospitality sector.
And why would Johnson have "Fought for Christmas"? is there any chance at all it didn't occur to him that this would cost lives?
And Johnson is an man who lies far too often for any sane person not to suspect his motives

The latest victory claim is that "one shot of vaccine gives 80% protection"
We all already knew that
What is conveniently being played down is that Two injections at the proper interval raise that protection to 96% or even 98%
So this huge and important difference is being sacrificed for political reasons, not really practical ones.
What we seek on here is the best protection possible for the public
Not the politicians

 

[Suzan]

Unfortunately it isn't necessarily a silly conspiracy theory, when this government itself was founded by conspirators
Let me give you two examples of risking human lives for the sake of popularity
"Eat out to help out"
Great idea if you are an undertaker, or in the hospitality sector.
And why would Johnson have "Fought for Christmas"? is there any chance at all it didn't occur to him that this would cost lives?
And Johnson is an man who lies far too often for any sane person not to suspect his motives

The latest victory claim is that "one shot of vaccine gives 80% protection"
We all already knew that
What is conveniently being played down is that Two injections at the proper interval raise that protection to 96% or even 98%
So this huge and important difference is being sacrificed for political reasons, not really practical ones.
What we seek on here is the best protection possible for the public
Not the politicians

I totally agree with sentiments around maximum benefit for us all. So let's examine your figures.
Assume your higher figure (95%?) achieved after 2 doses. (stopping hospitalisation)
Now let's assume only 75% after a single dose.
Multiply the figure achieved by the number helped to give a figure for total benefit. (assume 3 weeks from now for ease)
Today we have had 21 million fist dose.
So 75%x21 million is roughly 15 million kept away from hospital.(potentially)
Now assume your regime of 2 doses. Halving the number helped. 10.5 million x95%.. Around 9 million kept away from hospital.
Your argument is not correct around it being a political decision. If it is, it will fail, where does that leave BJ? The decision is made for right reasons by those making the decision. Yes, it could be wrong, but its looking as though it is not. Either way calling it political is misled. Even from Johnson's point of view it must be a Sage decision. If its not his political career is absolutely on the line. Short term success (as I explained earlier) is of no use to anyone. Johnson included. Getting a good start in a marathon is important but crossing the line much more so. He knows full well his political future will be decided in perhaps a year's time. He can't risk not getting over the line by jeapordising race with a faulty start. Nobody can.
Your argument defeats itself. Why would he or Sage destroy a good finish for a lead in opinion polls today? It would be sense less and he and Sage simply aren't.