EasilyAmused
Registered User
- Messages
- 398
The U.K. also has a universal health care system. Everyone has a registration number from cradle to grave. This makes the rollout a lot easier.
I'm basing my opinion on facts rather than media gloss or propaganda...
The UK had a four week head start because the EU took longer to approve based on the same data. In the end the approval was a formality.
Do you know if vaccines are being administered at weekends?You appear to miss the rather important matter of having vaccines to rollout.
No idea on generalpopulation, there has been some to GP's and medical staff....Do you know if vaccines are being administered at weekends?
You need to check your facts so. AZ only requested formal EU approval in mid January, long after they had done so in the UK. The EU had been calling on them to release data required to assess it earlier
Probably due to pressure from the UK government combined with the lower price EU was prepared to pay. Time will tell.Why the delay in applying?
Allegedly.....(smiley face here)Probably due to pressure from the UK government combined with the lower price EU was prepared to pay. Time will tell.
Probably due to pressure from the UK government combined with the lower price EU was prepared to pay. Time will tell.
There's little doubt something was done to favour the UK, yields in the AZ EU factories was fine when producing the initial batches but then fell off a cliff.That was my sense of it too. Perhaps the UK government, desperate for a good news spin on Brexit offered incentives to prioritise the UK market? I haven't seen any statement from AZ explaining why they waited weeks before releasing the full trial data to the EMA and then until Jan. 12th to submit the request for approval. The EMA were calling on AZ to release more date during December.
This looks like politicians trying to ingratiate themselves with patient lobby groups. If some groups will be moved up the queue, who will be moved down?From RTE:
People with underlying health conditions are set to be moved up the vaccination priority list under a plan being worked on by Government this weekend.
More than 370,000 people aged between 18 and 64 were ranked at number seven in the initial vaccination allocation list announced late last year.
This looks like politicians trying to ingratiate themselves with patient lobby groups. If some groups will be moved up the queue, who will be moved down?
The list as it exists has already been designed to prioritize at-risk groups, presumably based on scientific evidence. I just wonder if the revised list which de-prioritizes some at-risk groups is based on better science or on louder screaming by some lobby groups.People at lower risk of dying or suffering serious illness.
The list as it exists has already been designed to prioritize at-risk groups, presumably based on scientific evidence. Which at-risk groups will be de-prioritized?
The list contradicted earlier health advice - people with such conditions were told to cocoon basically.OK that's reassuring if it comes at the expense of groups who should never have been prioritized in the first place
So the initial prioritisation always seems off to me, I think they were relying on the vulnerable people to continue cocooning and not get infected which is reasonable in the short term but not when lockdowns extend for months.