Faster even than Boris at changing his mind!And now he's deleted it !
.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
..that was the Vice Chair ,who thought he had 2 more months grace.!.Was anyone else upset as well?
Sorry couldn't help it
One of my brothers in law had the vaccine a couple of days ago and it was the Pfizer jab, he went to one of those large vaccination centers in Llandudno North Wales. Everyone at that time was getting the Pfizer vaccine, so I don't know if more supply has come into the country or if they are using up some of the supply they had been storing.
It's still the original 5000 doses, the distribution was very badly done with excess in some places and far too little in others.
For example many northern areas had far more than necessary for their over 80s so went onto the 70s and even reaching many second doses for 70s and 80s, while London only had enougn to reach half the over 80s with the first dose. Hence us being on the AZ now so quickly.
It's one of the reasons why I've been annoyed at the claims the program has been going well. In sheer numbers yes, but in distribution it's been a shambles that's caused unnecessary deaths.
.
The various authorities just can't stop making a mess of the vaccination program.
Latest is that the Barts Health Trust messaged invitations to get a vaccine that were meant for NHS workers to hundreds of school teachers instead, so many of the schoolteachers have got injected well before their turn.
Hopefully they are catching up on the health workers who missed out.
.
Latest is that the Barts Health Trust messaged invitations to get a vaccine that were meant for NHS workers to hundreds of school teachers instead, so many of the schoolteachers have got injected well before their turn.
Hopefully they are catching up on the health workers who missed out.
.
Not sure that's true:Faster even than Boris at changing his mind!
The ambiguity created some confusion, with Downing Street repeatedly declining over recent days to specify a deadline. The inclusion of May in the elections plan appeared to catch No 10 off guard. Johnson’s deputy spokesperson initially said of the document: “This was issued in error, and I believe the Cabinet Office have now withdrawn this.”
Several minutes later, he corrected himself, saying: “It isn’t actually being withdrawn.” He then conceded: “The Cabinet Office document is correct – what it says is correct – and the prime minister will set out more details on 15 February.”
Likely leaked out via healthcare staff to friend/family teachers - still better than chucking away any unused doses.
Covid vaccine: Teachers sent Covid jab booking link for NHS staff
A message intended for healthcare workers in London has been forwarded to local teaching staff.
www.bbc.co.uk
The trust has admitted it had sent booking links to non-frontline hospital staff to use up leftover doses of its vaccines. It is thought that the exploit was leaked this way.
Same here, in the NHS it's a toxic mix of brown nosing, narcissistic posturing and some incest (metaphorically speaking). Its enough to make one wish covid would mutate into Ebola.
Will Dido get the sack?
Test And Trace Using ‘Dodgy Statistics' To Claim Credit For Everyone Who Self-Isolates
Under-fire service admits 90% of its alleged impact on R rate is actually down to people staying home when they get sick.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/test-and-trace-dodgy-statistics-impact-on-r_uk_601d7a82c5b66c385ef91a9f
Test And Trace Using ‘Dodgy Statistics' To Claim Credit For Everyone Who Self-Isolates
Under-fire service admits 90% of its alleged impact on R rate is actually down to people staying home when they get sick.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/test-and-trace-dodgy-statistics-impact-on-r_uk_601d7a82c5b66c385ef91a9f
It ain't hangin its dragin..its friday, just had a good run, am exactly 3 years from early retirement . How's things with you?
15 pages of stats and graphs re Covid 19 for those of you who are having trouble getting to sleep.
Imperial College London: Potential profile of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK under different vaccination roll out strategies, 13 January 2021 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Imperial College London: Potential profile of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK under different vaccination roll out strategies, 13 January 2021 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Beast from the east 2
'Beast from the East Two' to bring snow, ice and floods - BBC News
'Beast from the East Two' to bring snow, ice and floods - BBC News
LBC were reporting something strange this morning, they did not know if it was true or possibly a hoax. They had been told of instances were people going in to get the vaccine and refusing to accept it if it was the Pfizer one and demanding they want the British AZ one or else they did not want to be vaccinated.
Seems hard to believe but then again baring in mind it was not that long ago people were burning down phone masts because they thought they could catch Covid from them maybe its not all that surprising.
Seems hard to believe but then again baring in mind it was not that long ago people were burning down phone masts because they thought they could catch Covid from them maybe its not all that surprising.
Without looking it up, my immediate reaction is:
Not at all surprised if this has happened.
The number doing so is likely a handful and therefore the story is omelet-and-souffle-and-Easter-all-at-once over-egged.
Adding:
Now had a look around - this story was widely reported around 07/01/2021. No idea if your LBC version is a repeat, a resurgence, or just crap.
Cool dude.
Could be worse for you than cruisin’ hospitals. Some of them nurses have got it goin’ on man
Another example of pragmatism overriding science.
The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) assesses how to handle biological hazards from anthrax to Ebola.
Back in January 2020, as details emerged from Wuhan, the committee had added the new coronavirus to a grim list of illnesses defined as a "high consequence infectious disease".
That alarming label carried a host of implications for labs and hospitals around the country.
It meant that ambulances had to go through a three-hour cleaning process between patients, and that everyone dealing with the virus had to wear a certain grade of PPE.
That included the FFP3 masks that Dr Butler and others had been poised to wear.
But on 13 March the advisory committee ruled coronavirus would no longer be defined as "high consequence".
Why did this decision matter?
The exact reasons for the decision have not been made public.
A government statement a few days later said it was a "technical" definition that simply reflected the fact that the death rate from the virus was much less severe than expected - far lower than Ebola, for example, where as many as 50% of infected people die.
In any event, the decision acted like a lubricant to the cogs of government.
The Department for Health and Social Care was said to be "moving towards" a shift from FFP3 masks to surgical ones, and a rapid sequence of events then made that happen:
Prof Jonathan Van-Tam, the deputy chief medical officer, agreed to consult the ACDP, the group advising on dangerous pathogens
Its chair told him that his committee was "unanimous" in declassifying the coronavirus as "high consequence"
That day another key committee - Nervtag (the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group) - was told the government supported changing PPE recommendations
So, in a matter of hours, the key figures were aligned and the way was clear for a new message to go out: FFP3s were no longer required on the wards - as Dr Butler would discover when he reached his hospital the following morning.
A 'pragmatic' decision
"Did Public Health England and the Department of Health use the decision on a high consequence infectious disease as a cover for a change in clinical guidance? Possibly."
So could hospital staff have been better protected?
"Bluntly, in hospitals, you have to accept a certain level of infection. You could move to Ebola-style controls, but then you couldn't treat 40,000 patients."
Covid PPE: How healthcare workers came to feel 'expendable'
Almost a year in to the pandemic, concerns remain over personal protective equipment.
www.bbc.co.uk
The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) assesses how to handle biological hazards from anthrax to Ebola.
Back in January 2020, as details emerged from Wuhan, the committee had added the new coronavirus to a grim list of illnesses defined as a "high consequence infectious disease".
That alarming label carried a host of implications for labs and hospitals around the country.
It meant that ambulances had to go through a three-hour cleaning process between patients, and that everyone dealing with the virus had to wear a certain grade of PPE.
That included the FFP3 masks that Dr Butler and others had been poised to wear.
But on 13 March the advisory committee ruled coronavirus would no longer be defined as "high consequence".
Why did this decision matter?
The exact reasons for the decision have not been made public.
A government statement a few days later said it was a "technical" definition that simply reflected the fact that the death rate from the virus was much less severe than expected - far lower than Ebola, for example, where as many as 50% of infected people die.
In any event, the decision acted like a lubricant to the cogs of government.
The Department for Health and Social Care was said to be "moving towards" a shift from FFP3 masks to surgical ones, and a rapid sequence of events then made that happen:
Prof Jonathan Van-Tam, the deputy chief medical officer, agreed to consult the ACDP, the group advising on dangerous pathogens
Its chair told him that his committee was "unanimous" in declassifying the coronavirus as "high consequence"
That day another key committee - Nervtag (the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group) - was told the government supported changing PPE recommendations
So, in a matter of hours, the key figures were aligned and the way was clear for a new message to go out: FFP3s were no longer required on the wards - as Dr Butler would discover when he reached his hospital the following morning.
A 'pragmatic' decision
"Did Public Health England and the Department of Health use the decision on a high consequence infectious disease as a cover for a change in clinical guidance? Possibly."
So could hospital staff have been better protected?
"Bluntly, in hospitals, you have to accept a certain level of infection. You could move to Ebola-style controls, but then you couldn't treat 40,000 patients."
Good post Wicky..Another example of pragmatism overriding science.
Covid PPE: How healthcare workers came to feel 'expendable'
Almost a year in to the pandemic, concerns remain over personal protective equipment.www.bbc.co.uk
The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) assesses how to handle biological hazards from anthrax to Ebola.
Back in January 2020, as details emerged from Wuhan, the committee had added the new coronavirus to a grim list of illnesses defined as a "high consequence infectious disease".
That alarming label carried a host of implications for labs and hospitals around the country.
It meant that ambulances had to go through a three-hour cleaning process between patients, and that everyone dealing with the virus had to wear a certain grade of PPE.
That included the FFP3 masks that Dr Butler and others had been poised to wear.
But on 13 March the advisory committee ruled coronavirus would no longer be defined as "high consequence".
Why did this decision matter?
The exact reasons for the decision have not been made public.
A government statement a few days later said it was a "technical" definition that simply reflected the fact that the death rate from the virus was much less severe than expected - far lower than Ebola, for example, where as many as 50% of infected people die.
In any event, the decision acted like a lubricant to the cogs of government.
The Department for Health and Social Care was said to be "moving towards" a shift from FFP3 masks to surgical ones, and a rapid sequence of events then made that happen:
Prof Jonathan Van-Tam, the deputy chief medical officer, agreed to consult the ACDP, the group advising on dangerous pathogens
Its chair told him that his committee was "unanimous" in declassifying the coronavirus as "high consequence"
That day another key committee - Nervtag (the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group) - was told the government supported changing PPE recommendations
So, in a matter of hours, the key figures were aligned and the way was clear for a new message to go out: FFP3s were no longer required on the wards - as Dr Butler would discover when he reached his hospital the following morning.
A 'pragmatic' decision
"Did Public Health England and the Department of Health use the decision on a high consequence infectious disease as a cover for a change in clinical guidance? Possibly."
So could hospital staff have been better protected?
"Bluntly, in hospitals, you have to accept a certain level of infection. You could move to Ebola-style controls, but then you couldn't treat 40,000 patients."
Couldn't you argue pragmatism is part of the science to treat the numbers involved..
Let's face it a health service of size and capability to totally deal with our levels of infection could not be maintained indefinitely?
There needs to be systems in place to prevent levels going to those we, ve seen. That needs world cooperation. Perhaps for the future???