Slow news day? The real deal? End of the world? 
 

They’re saying it probably came from an animal, has Somebody been shagging monkeys again? 

Just now, Casino said:

Sorry, what i meant was im sure its 3 weeks after the jab for it to give protection

 

Yeah, I mis read it.

I think anywhere north of 10million done by 15th Feb would be ok.

13million would be splendid.

Just now, Spider said:

I think anywhere north of 10million done by 15th Feb would be ok.

13million would be splendid.

If they've only done 10M by 15th February and not the 13M they keep promising, then whilst still a great effort, questions will need to be asked, and they should be fairly easy to answer.

As of this morning they're still saying the 13M is still on, so I don't see why we would fall massively short, unless they utterly balls it up

3 minutes ago, Sweep said:

If they've only done 10M by 15th February and not the 13M they keep promising, then whilst still a great effort, questions will need to be asked, and they should be fairly easy to answer.

As of this morning they're still saying the 13M is still on, so I don't see why we would fall massively short, unless they utterly balls it up

This Government seem to do this. Aim for a extremely high target and take the flack if and when it doesn't get there.

There's a school of thought that that's actually more effective than aiming for a more modest target and then missing out on that one. 

Gotta think big! 

4 minutes ago, Sweep said:

If they've only done 10M by 15th February and not the 13M they keep promising, then whilst still a great effort, questions will need to be asked, and they should be fairly easy to answer.

As of this morning they're still saying the 13M is still on, so I don't see why we would fall massively short, unless they utterly balls it up

Supply of the actual vaccine seems to be touch and go based on what I’ve read.

Cant argue with the amount of resource available to get jabs in arms.

Just desperately hoping they nail this

6 minutes ago, Sweep said:

If they've only done 10M by 15th February and not the 13M they keep promising, then whilst still a great effort, questions will need to be asked, and they should be fairly easy to answer.

As of this morning they're still saying the 13M is still on, so I don't see why we would fall massively short, unless they utterly balls it up

Open goal from here, a Deano moment.

please nobody upload the video

2 minutes ago, kent_white said:

This Government seem to do this. Aim for a extremely high target and take the flack if and when it doesn't get there.

There's a school of thought that that's actually more effective than aiming for a more modest target and then missing out on that one. 

Gotta think big! 

Something in that. Aim for 13 and achieve 12, or aim for 10 and achieve 11?

 

Obviously, if youre looking to make an impact, you do the easy ones first, perfectly hatural, no criticism from me

But what we are finding now is theres a good number who 'cant get there' and theres still uncertainty of supply

So, as you cant book a clinic until you have vax in hand, its a logistical nightmare as we say 

im thinking the superhubs are probably  getting more regular volumes which makes sense for sheer numbers

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Something in that. Aim for 13 and achieve 12, or aim for 10 and achieve 11?

 

Aim for 13 all day long. Why should 11 be seen as more of a success than 12 using your example. 
 

if they did 20 certain folk would still complain anyway 

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Something in that. Aim for 13 and achieve 12, or aim for 10 and achieve 11?

 

Exactly - some of the senior managers in the NHS use exactly the same idea. On record as well.

Not sure it's the right approach day today, but under circumstances like this, maybe?

Same thing happened with testing - and now I think we're around about number 1 in the world per 1000? 

Expect to take some flak early on but get more done in the long run. 

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

Exactly - some of the senior managers in the NHS use exactly the same idea. On record as well.

Not sure it's the right approach day today, but under circumstances like this, maybe?

Same thing happened with testing - and now I think we're around about number 1 in the world per 1000? 

Expect to take some flak early on but get more done in the long run. 

I'd agree day to day could be risky.

But nowt wrong with ambition.

I reckon that's what's keeping me relatively enthused about Evatt. Something just says he'll come good.

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I'd agree day to day could be risky.

But nowt wrong with ambition.

I reckon that's what's keeping me relatively enthused about Evatt. Something just says he'll come good.

Over reach I think they call it. 

There's a time and a place for it - but that time and place is probably now! 

Plenty of positive news this morning. It sounds like we’re doing 300,000 a day with the resources already in place to do significantly more. If we can get hold of more vaccine then you sense we could be doing 400,000 or even 500,000 a day. Plenty of new vaccination centres joining all the time and we haven’t moved to 24/7. It’s going to be all about supply.

looks like the Brazilian one is already here

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55676637

16 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

looks like the Brazilian one is already here

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55676637

Was going to say other day it will already be here. By the time these are discovered chances are they will have spread to a lot places including here. 

1 hour ago, kent_white said:

This Government seem to do this. Aim for a extremely high target and take the flack if and when it doesn't get there.

There's a school of thought that that's actually more effective than aiming for a more modest target and then missing out on that one. 

Gotta think big! 

No problem with that, set a big target and be honest about factors if you don't get there. They would get most people on board if they acted that way.

Unfortunately they have form for hiding or distorting data to make it look like they made their target.

13 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Quite. If they're distorting data, they're making a bad job of it.

Must admit I was somewhat surprised

Biggest surprise for me is the frogs. Louis Pasteur was one of their own ffs.

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Biggest surprise for me is the frogs. Louis Pasteur was one of their own ffs.

If it was a french vaccine they’d be near 100%
 

Dont want no Rosbíf vaccine

2 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Biggest surprise for me is the frogs. Louis Pasteur was one of their own ffs.

They think they are summat

1 minute ago, Spider said:

If it was a french vaccine they’d be near 100%
 

Dont want no Rosbíf vaccine

And certainly no Kraut one.

5 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

They think they are summat

Exactly

Tell them the vaccine is grown on the perfect soils of Paulliac, or been created in the kitchens and bakeries of Paris and they'd be all over it.

They are simply jealous.

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by Spider

Vaccine D'Astra