When will this shit end?

[st dan]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

I'm definitely anti brexit but this is a rare instance where we are better of not involved in the vaccine procurement.

Yep, also voted remain and very much still believe we would be better off as part of the EU for all the advantages it brings, but there are certainly going to be positives of Brexit, many of which we didn’t even necessarily know before we stumbled upon them - this certainly looks like one of them. 

[onthebeach]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Lol...

 

That's just not true. If Germany was forced to use the EU system we would have done. 

I'm definitely anti brexit but this is a rare instance where we are better of not involved in the vaccine procurement.

I’m not sure - didn’t Hungary ‘break ranks’ and purchase their own vaccines?

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

Nope. Germany chose to opt into the EU scheme, member states could have approved vaccines for Emergency Approval individually. If we had done that would have been by choice, so we could have carried on as we are now if we were still part of the EU. 

Then why did no country other than Hungary opt out of the vaccine procurement scheme?

Why didn't the countries above tell the EU commission to piss of when they delayed the AZ contract by 2 months?

I feel you are discounting political pressure within the EU

Like its fine to say the EU have screwed up here. Are you disuting Peston's reporting?

[zahidf]

Just now, onthebeach said:

I’m not sure - didn’t Hungary ‘break ranks’ and purchase their own vaccines?

Hungary are a slightly different proposition because of Oban. I dont really see them as bing 'in the tent' politially in the EU to same extent we would have been if we stayed

 

[DeanoL]

2 minutes ago, st dan said:

Yep, also voted remain and very much still believe we would be better off as part of the EU for all the advantages it brings, but there are certainly going to be positives of Brexit, many of which we didn’t even necessarily know before we stumbled upon them - this certainly looks like one of them. 

Can't argue that that's possible. But equally maybe we would have pointed out that we're the EU experts on vaccination infrastructure and used our influence to make the EU act faster, and the whole of Europe might be better off.

[incident]

Just now, onthebeach said:

I’m not sure - didn’t Hungary ‘break ranks’ and purchase their own vaccines?

Yes, they did.

Because the claim that EU members were forced to do anything is outright false - Germany might have been obliged to drop their own plans by virtue of joining the EU purchasing scheme, but they definitely had no obligation to opt into the scheme - other than arguably morally due to them being one of the biggest proponents of the EU.

[zahidf]

 

[xxialac]

Yeah, @Ozanne is right on this and I am questioning Peston's reporting. He's not the sage.

And if this is a benefit, it's an accidental one.

The main arguments cited to leave the EU were to control immigration, make trade deals, make our own laws and save £350m/week (sic).

If I'm a football manager and sign an expensive striker who's a complete dud but turns out to be a genius goalkeeper, I don't deserve the credit.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, incident said:

Yes, they did.

Because the claim that EU members were forced to do anything is outright false - Germany might have been obliged to drop their own plans by virtue of joining the EU purchasing scheme, but they definitely had no obligation to opt into the scheme - other than arguably morally due to them being one of the biggest proponents of the EU.

Its almost impossible to prove a hypothetical i guess. I'm just basing it on no other major EU country going out on their own as an indication that of we were still in, we'd probably do the same as France/Germany/Italy e.t.c. 

[Ozanne]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

Then why did no country other than Hungary opt out of the vaccine procurement scheme?

Why didn't the countries above tell the EU commission to piss of when they delayed the AZ contract by 2 months?

I feel you are discounting political pressure within the EU

Like its fine to say the EU have screwed up here. Are you disuting Peston's reporting?

So you agree that if the U.K. was part of the EU we could’ve gone our own way like Hungary did?

I would think the other member states acted as a bloc.

If this is being hailed as a positive of Brexit then that’s not entirely accurate as we could be carrying on as we are now even if we were part of the EU. 

[st dan]

2 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yeah, @Ozanne is right on this and I am questioning Peston's reporting. He's not the sage.

And if this is a benefit, it's an accidental one.

The main arguments cited to leave the EU were to control immigration, make trade deals, make our own laws and save £350m/week (sic).

If I'm a football manager and sign an expensive striker who's a complete dud but turns out to be a genius goalkeeper, I don't deserve the credit.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, xxialac said:

Yeah, @Ozanne is right on this and I am questioning Peston's reporting. He's not the sage.

And if this is a benefit, it's an accidental one.

The main arguments cited to leave the EU were to control immigration, make trade deals, make our own laws and save £350m/week (sic).

If I'm a football manager and sign an expensive striker who's a complete dud but turns out to be a genius goalkeeper, I don't deserve the credit.

Pestons dates on contracts are on the record though: he's isn't making dates up....

Oh, I'm not defending brexit.  At the same time, I think its fine to point out we are benefitting from it in terms of vaccine procurements.

[Copperface]

49 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Yeah, UK supply of the AZ vaccine is 80/20 domestic vs EU manufactured, so I suspect that are asking for clarity on whether doses manufactured in the EU are being sent to the UK while not being able to deliver what was ordered. 

Mr Duck,

Maybe you can put this AZ efficacy confusion to bed. Even AZ haven't clarified the below, nor have MHRA or anyone else.

The way I understand it is as follows:

The standard two dose SD:SD regimen was reported at 62.5% from the trials.  (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32661-1/fulltext)

The LD:SD dose on a small trial subsection but nobody over 55 yielded a 90% efficacy rate.

AZ when they presented to MHRA and JCVI gave data which averaged the two percentages (not including trial group sizes) out giving a rate of 70%.

MHRA then gave out a 73% efficacy based on one dose after an 'exploratory analysis of 'some' trial participants but no data presented.

Confusion abounds. How does one dose have more efficacy than two?
Is this correct?

[zahidf]

Just now, Ozanne said:

So you agree that if the U.K. was part of the EU we could’ve gone our own way like Hungary did?

I would think the other member states acted as a bloc.

If this is being hailed as a positive of Brexit then that’s not entirely accurate as we could be carrying on as we are now even if we were part of the EU. 

Practically maybe. But no other country except Hungary has done it. Why do you think we would follow Hungary instead of France/Germany?

[Crazyfool01]

No suprise that Boris is late ... 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

I’m inclined to think whether we were in the EU or not, we would’ve gone on our own with the vaccines, a bit like with our currency. That’s not to say it isn’t a good thing we have regardless of whether we would’ve anyway.

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Practically maybe. But no other country except Hungary has done it. Why do you think we would follow Hungary instead of France/Germany?

We wouldn’t be following anyone, we would just be carrying on our own way as part of our unique membership of the EU. As we’ve done with many other things such as the Euro. 
 

This isn’t a benefit of Brexit. 

Edited January 26, 2021 by Ozanne

[fraybentos1]

5 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yeah, @Ozanne is right on this and I am questioning Peston's reporting. He's not the sage.

And if this is a benefit, it's an accidental one.

The main arguments cited to leave the EU were to control immigration, make trade deals, make our own laws and save £350m/week (sic).

If I'm a football manager and sign an expensive striker who's a complete dud but turns out to be a genius goalkeeper, I don't deserve the credit.

I don't thin anyone is really saying that this is only possible cause of brexit, just that the EU vaccine process atm is a shambles and ours is going way better. 
 

Also, no reason why Uk vaccines should be lessened to make up for problems the EU is having. Not our fault they have dawdled.

 

[zahidf]

Teachers, police and people with learning disabilities will need to be considered for the next round of Covid-19 vaccinations, Sir Simon Stevens said on Tuesday.

The NHS England chief executive said:

Our current proposition that once we have offered a vaccination to everyone aged 70 and above, and the clinically extremely vulnerable, then the next group of people would be people in their 60s and 50s, but there will also be a legitimate discussion in my view that the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation will have to advise on as to whether or not there are certain other groups who should receive that priority.

People with learning disabilities and autism, certain key public service workers, teachers, the police, they will have to be factored in that post-February 15 prioritisation decision.

[DeanoL]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Practically maybe. But no other country except Hungary has done it. Why do you think we would follow Hungary instead of France/Germany?

Because we did with currency. And Schengan. And the rebate. 

If this had happened in 2015 and you asked me to bet which country in the EU wouldn't join the vaccine collective thing, it'd be the UK, not Hungary!

[hodgey123]

The argument about EU or not EU re the vaccines is just an extension of the 'can we give praise to the government for anything' argument that was had last week. It is perfectly acceptable to believe that we should not have left the EU whilst recognising the issues they are having with vaccines compared to the UK, just as it is perfectly acceptable to believe that the government have made errors at almost every turn in this pandemic but appear to have done well with the vaccine response. It is indicative of society at the moment - everything is partisan with no nuance.

Edited January 26, 2021 by hodgey123
wrong

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

I don't thin anyone is really saying that this is only possible cause of brexit, just that the EU vaccine process atm is a shambles and ours is going way better. 
 

Also, no reason why Uk vaccines should be lessened to make up for problems the EU is having. Not our fault they have dawdled.

 

The EU isn't saying they want to take vaccinations AZ had earmarked for the UK. That's a facile interpretation. They don't care if the vaccines come from the moon, they just want them.

These are vaccines they say they were legally and contractually obliged to receive and they seem to think there was the production available.

This may be false but if it's true, you can understand their position.

[incident]

9 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Its almost impossible to prove a hypothetical i guess. I'm just basing it on no other major EU country going out on their own as an indication that of we were still in, we'd probably do the same as France/Germany/Italy e.t.c. 

We've often been the odd one out in stuff like that though - I can't see any reason why it'd be any different this time.

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, hodgey123 said:

The argument about EU or not EU re the vaccines is just an extension of the 'can we give praise to the government for anything' argument that was had last week. It is perfectly acceptable to believe that we should not have left the EU whilst recognising the issues they are having with vaccines compared to the UK, just as it is perfectly acceptable to believe that the government have made errors at almost every turn in this pandemic but appear to have done well with the vaccine response. It is indicative of society at the moment - everything is bipartisan with no nuance.

I think you mean polarised. Bipartisan would be high levels of agreement.

[hodgey123]

1 minute ago, xxialac said:

I think you mean polarised. Bipartisan would be high levels of agreement.

Yeah of course, my bad! Or just partisan would have sufficed