Would you not expect those who are Covid positive and contagious, but still not to the point to trigger a positive antigen test to be a problem there?
No I'm with the Harvard epidemiologist on this who says that the people that would be missed are those with viral RNA concentrations that are ~99.99999% reduced from peak infectivity and are no longer contagious.
NPHET are hinting they may suggest relaxing restrictions for those fully vaccinated. It's being referred to as a "vaccine bonus".
Relaxing of restrictions on 5th April (e.g. construction) is becoming increasingly unlikely.
I do hope they relax the rules on a round of golf.
I rarely play myself but if any outdoor, non-spectator exercise for the older person lends itself to social distancing it's this one.
Frankly I fear the government will face a losing battle to keep public goodwill once the fine weather comes, particularly as they've performed so poorly on the vaccine roll-out and continue to blame manufacturers rather than their EU overlords.
I agree with this.I do hope they relax the rules on a round of golf.
I rarely play myself but if any outdoor, non-spectator exercise for the older person lends itself to social distancing it's this one.
Frankly I fear the government will face a losing battle to keep public goodwill once the fine weather comes,
EU Overlords, really?particularly as they've performed so poorly on the vaccine roll-out and continue to blame manufacturers rather than their EU overlords.
I agree with this.
EU Overlords, really?
That sort of emotive language kind of invalidates your point and makes you sound stupid. Where the blame lies between the EU and AZ is still unclear but neither side is looking good. At the moment the EU looks naive and AZ look like liars.
See above ref emotive language.AstraZeneca look perfectly tickety-boo to those countries which negotiated professionally with them and secured binding contracts.
The EU left their procurement in the hands of a failed German defence minister.
The only people bleating now are those who rather stupidly entrusted her with the job.
Sandra Gallina was the lead negotiator and she's Italian, she also answers all questions by MEPs in relation to the vaccine procurement who is this "failed German defense minister " ?AstraZeneca look perfectly tickety-boo to those countries which negotiated professionally with them and secured binding contracts.
The EU left their procurement in the hands of a failed German defence minister.
The only people bleating now are those who rather stupidly entrusted her with the job.
Sandra Gallina was the lead negotiator and she's Italian, she also answers all questions by MEPs in relation to the vaccine procurement who is this "failed German defense minister " ?
Ahh the Spectator must be true so ......I mean they wouldn't have a biased view on the EU at all.Ursula Von Der Leyen is the failed German Defence Minister and she took personal charge of the vaccine procurement programme
You can read all about it here.
www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-eu-has-botched-its-vaccination-programme
It's why that arch-EU fanboy Guy Verhofstadt has distanced himself from the German and attacked the EU's contract negotiations.
He knows which way the wind is blowing.
Ahh the Spectator must be true so ......I mean they wouldn't have a biased view on the EU at all.
It's very light on facts.But are there any facts in the article which you think are untrue ?
I'll sneer at what ever I want to, the Spectator is a jingoistic rag. I have other news outlets to use.But are there any facts in the article which you think are untrue ?
It's co-authored by the UK’s former immunisation director so I presume he knows what he's talking about.
If you disagree perhaps you could provide alternative information rather than sneer at the source.
It's very light on facts.
Here's a quote; The EMA says AstraZeneca hasn’t submitted its application yet; it doesn’t seem to occur to anyone to pick up the phone and ask. EU institutions still see their role as blocking what could be dangerous innovations. No one has stopped to wonder if sometimes — such as in a pandemic, for example — it might be better to encourage technology. But that’s bureaucracy: it sticks to the script long after it stops making sense.
The authors have made a series of assumptions and accusations which they have made absolutely no effort to back up. It's the sort of thing that would cause bemused head shaking if overheard from some verbose drunkard in a pub.
There is no attempt to deal with facts or accurate timelines, just swipes at politicians and staff based on their nationality. I'm not a regular reader of the Spectator and if that's the standard of what passes for journalism I'm comfortable with missing their, em, "insights".
I'll sneer at what ever I want to, the Spectator is a jingoistic rag. I have other news outlets to use.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?