Making a new law, or adding to existing laws whether by Act or SI, or whatever, is seen as a response. Applying existing law isn't.
At least, that is my interpretation of why they so often creation new legislation.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
At least, that is my interpretation of why they so often creation new legislation.
Wonder if we ever actually know what's going on... Its certainly not doing Police image and respect much good...
Hopefully you are correct ... But there is unfortunately potentially another explanation. All the AZ used outside the UK is made in Europe, since the UK has exported nothing. Now lets say the magic sauce is missing. The vaccines were validated using the UK manufactured product.
I think you have missed the biggest manufacturer! And with news below, we can't just pretend that nothing that matters exists in the rest of the world (outside UK & Europe)!
UK to receive 10 million AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine doses from India's Serum Institute
By Bhargav Acharya
3 Min Read
(Reuters) - The UK will receive 10 million AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine doses made by the Serum Institute of India (SII), the UK government said on Tuesday.
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-britain-india-idUSKCN2AV0A2
I had seen that the UK had ordered from India. However that doesn't affect the alleged blood clotting instances reported in Europe. Note the UK has of yet not imported from India, but may have imported from the EU.
But my point was that you had said "All the AZ used outside the UK is made in Europe,..."
Its near-future use in the UK was just an additional observation.
I can’t see the problem.This is the actual bill going through parliament that could well end up costing the government dearly
How on Earth are they expecting to actually implement this?
North Korean or China style camps?
OK.. but the immediate problem is that a number of EU countries have put a halt to AZ i use.,due to blood clotting factors . Whether this is even statistically significant is the first point, whether it is specific batch related is next and then whether it is general process related is the next , and that begs the question as to whether it has manifested in UK manufactured product, or whether the PHE QA has failed to notice it.., . This is urgent and needs to concern the UK as well.
Germany elections: Merkel's party suffers setback in regional polls - BBC News
The German chancellor's Christian Democrats (CDU) heavily in two former stronghold regions.
www.bbc.co.uk
Here's a thing
Reading the information supplied with the Pfizer Vaccine it specified that both injections should be from the same batch.
I guess the decision had originally been taken for a reason and clearly doesn't apply now with the period going from four weeks to whenever
Since problems have shown up with the other vaccine, I wonder how much variability occurs between batches?
Of any of the brands.
Reading the information supplied with the Pfizer Vaccine it specified that both injections should be from the same batch.
I guess the decision had originally been taken for a reason and clearly doesn't apply now with the period going from four weeks to whenever
Since problems have shown up with the other vaccine, I wonder how much variability occurs between batches?
Of any of the brands.
I really hope this is his fully independent and deeply considered opinion. No reason to suggest otherwise! But in these days of suspicions...
There's no evidence the Oxford vaccine causes blood clots. So why are people worried?
David Spiegelhalter
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/15/evidence-oxford-vaccine-blood-clots-data-causal-links
There's no evidence the Oxford vaccine causes blood clots. So why are people worried?
David Spiegelhalter
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/15/evidence-oxford-vaccine-blood-clots-data-causal-links
The Clown Prince of London has spoken.Interesting....
And of course nothing whatsoever will change
Only in the movies. I'm a firearms cert holder and the bullet would have gone through
the tyre, hit the car bodywork/suspension and gone anywhere, killing the police officer or some poor sod walking by. shooting at the tyres with a pistol would have cost him his job, it might have been possible with a shotgun and specially designed rounds.
Standard practice is to aim for the front chest and if this was the case, the police officer
would have been stood in front of the car.
I don’t know if flecc’s post references a U.K. incident or if it took place elsewhere. I can’t find what it relates to.
I think in the U.K. a police firearm can only be discharged for one reason, lethal force. Discharging a police firearm for anything else, like disabling a vehicle, would be considered illegal and the officer would face disciplinary action.
Daveboy’s example is a good one, if the bullet fragmented and shrapnel injured or killed someone, the officer would be liable for man slaughter or even murder.
To use lethal force, the officer must believe and be able to justify why he thought a person’s life, including his own, was in immediate danger. Something like a suspect refusing to put down a gun isn’t enough. If the suspect begins to raise the gun towards the officer or another person, that will be sufficient for the officer to legally shoot him. The target area is always the chest, if possible. That is the biggest target. Shooting at heads, legs & arms is likely to cause a miss and in that split second the suspect can fire back.
It makes sense really, because at the point the officer decides to use lethal force, he believes that if he doesn’t hit the suspect with a bullet, the suspect will take another person’s life. That’s the theory.
I’ve noticed that after I had my AZ vaccine on Friday, Mrs Harrison’s cat, which lives next door but one, was sick on my lawn! Should the EU now suspended all AZ vaccination until the link between the two events is proven to be broken?