Not dead or gay(as far as I know)

Does he have a point with the statement he made about the possibility of footballers and staff being vaccinated and so ending the twice a week tests and plunging the money that saves back into the NHS.   

I can see both sides of this but what would the general consensus be ?  

13 minutes ago, JimmyRiddle said:

Never said it did

And that is why we inject based on need not money. 
 

if you start selling it off how far do you go ? Top 10k 100k 1m? 
 

 

6 minutes ago, Ani said:

And that is why we inject based on need not money. 
 

if you start selling it off how far do you go ? Top 10k 100k 1m? 
 

 

The NHS inject based on need not money, not private healthcare, your conflating the two.

It is about offsetting the cost to us as tax payers! It is really that simple.

If the richest man in the UK wanted to pay his jab first, at the cost of the whole national roll out. i.e. making it free for the country, you'd say no?? 

 

38 minutes ago, JimmyRiddle said:

Never said it did

Yes you did.

2 hours ago, JimmyRiddle said:

The more people vaccinated earlier reduces the R rate for everyone. This includes footballers or any other high worth individual as it does me or you.

The more people taken out of the NHS Q to go private means someone else who can't afford it will get seen more quickly.

......

So at no point will Enid be impacted, minimally she may actually be in a better place.

 

its pretty much exactly what you said. You even said it would be better for footballer to be vaccinated rather than someone vulnerable.

10 minutes ago, JimmyRiddle said:

The NHS inject based on need not money, not private healthcare, your conflating the two.

It is about offsetting the cost to us as tax payers! It is really that simple.

If the richest man in the UK wanted to pay his jab first, at the cost of the whole national roll out. i.e. making it free for the country, you'd say no?? 

 

The NHS are currently limited by supply and whilst that is the factor it is needs based. If we have 1m doses on the shelves we should give to other countries before footballers. 
It is about saving lives it really is that simple. Football is currently still going ahead. You are arguing that a sport that is continuing during the pandemic should take vaccines away from people who might die. 
when your scenario occurs we will discuss. How far down the list do you go ? Asked earlier and you ignored. 
I doubt any pro footballer would actually want to jump the list. 

23 minutes ago, Ani said:

I doubt any pro footballer would actually want to jump the list. 

Well neither would I with the likes of you getting all pissy about it even though it benefits all. I've said multiple times they are not jumping anything, they would create their own queue. This is all because they are footballers, if they had a more socially acceptable job I doubt you would be so vitriolic.

It impacts you or your's not one jot, buts saves the country money! Is that really that hard to understand?.

Bet you also get chippy by people using the fast track queue at the airport, or flying business too; even though it's offsetting the cost of your flight! We all had the same chances in this life!

PS. The NHS are not limited by supply, there are lorries of the stuff coming in every day and a third supplier approved. But if supplies did dry up I fully agree with your sentiment that those in most need go first.

Edited January 10, 20215 yr by JimmyRiddle

2 minutes ago, JimmyRiddle said:

Well neither would I with the likes of you getting all pissy about it even though it benefits all. I've said multiple times they are not jumping anything, they would create their own queue. This is all because they are footballers, if they had a more socially acceptable job I doubt you would be so vitriolic.

It impacts you or your's not one jot, buts saves the country money! Is that really that hard to understand?.

Bet you also get chippy by people using the fast track queue at the airport, or flying business too; even though it's offsetting the cost of your flight! We all had the same chances in this life!

PS. The NHS are not limited by supply, there are lorries of the stuff coming in every day and a third supplier approved. But if supplies did dry up I fully agree with your sentiment that those in most need go first.

Every interview the Govt have given in last week has stated the only limitation is supply. So basically you are agreeing with me. 

You are talking as though this is a case of giving one dose to one person rather than another which is why I assume you are ignoring the question on how far you go. Top 100k bids ? 
 

Socially acceptable job ? Please give examples. The only ones that should be moved up the list are ones that there is evidence it would stop the spread. 
 

The airline comparison is pretty desperate. If I fly to America I have a choice of a number of airlines and prices and I choose if I want to travel and what price. Free market economy which I have no issue with. If there is a website vaccinescanner which gives all the choices in the same way that would be good. 
 

 

13 minutes ago, JimmyRiddle said:

Well neither would I with the likes of you getting all pissy about it even though it benefits all. I've said multiple times they are not jumping anything, they would create their own queue. This is all because they are footballers, if they had a more socially acceptable job I doubt you would be so vitriolic.

It impacts you or your's not one jot, buts saves the country money! Is that really that hard to understand?.

Bet you also get chippy by people using the fast track queue at the airport, or flying business too; even though it's offsetting the cost of your flight! We all had the same chances in this life!

PS. The NHS are not limited by supply, there are lorries of the stuff coming in every day and a third supplier approved. But if supplies did dry up I fully agree with your sentiment that those in most need go first.

It impacts me if my parents die because high wealth people (not necessarily footballers) can buy the vaccine before the needy get it.

Out of curiosity, where are all these excess vaccines ? If we all these that we couldnt use, surely the media would be full of it, as it really would be a scandal. 

We re almost arguing the same thing, its just that me and Ani (I believe) dont think there are these mystical excess doses that the NHS would miss.

4 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

We re almost arguing the same thing, its just that me and Ani (I believe) dont think there are these mystical excess doses that the NHS would miss.

Well if there aren't I agree.

7 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

Out of curiosity, where are all these excess vaccines ? If we all these that we couldnt use, surely the media would be full of it, as it really would be a scandal. 

It's inevitable a few will be wasted, but not that many and due to a sudden error, or a few people not turning up & limited opportunities to use them on another person.

Also, the Pfizer one especially, needs such careful handling there will be occasions when some is lost.

I read of some being left over because the queue dried up. So they gave attending cops what was left. Seems perfectly sensible.

But to positively plan to do it for reasons a pompous as Dyke's proposal because these pricks have an overblown sense of importance is wronger than a very wrong thing on Wrongday, in Wrongton, Wrongshire.

18 hours ago, JimmyRiddle said:

This would only ever be the case if thebrhe rate of innoculations matched the level of supply, clearly this is not the case. The bottleneck is in administering the jabs not producing the vaccine.

Plus It is far easier to ramp up production and supply when needed than it is to increase capacity to administer the jabs. 

Therefore why not sell some off to high value individuals to offset the cost to the tax payer. So long as the age groups quoted are receiving theirs when stated, what's the problem? 

We are talking surplus vaccines on a day by day basis here, not the entirety of the pandemic.

These are surplus vaccines in the supply chain that could be used; they wouldn't be being snatched from Enid in Moses Gate!

Production and qc checking of vaccine is the current bottleneck.

It might not be later.

I did see a comment from one individual, and only one which hasn't grown in terms of analysis, that said the vials of Pfizer one say there is 5 doses in each. However his experience is that they will do 6, and thus some is being lost.

Could be bollocks, and maybe Kent will be able to shed some light.

Edited January 10, 20215 yr by Tonge moor green jacket

4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

... the vials of Pfizer one say there is 5 doses in each. However his experience is that they will do 6, and thus some is being lost.

Could be bollocks, and maybe Kent will be able to shed some light.

It's correct. To get 5 guaranteed doses you have to have a tad more available in the vial.

What's left may not be a complete dose ... & you can hardly take a bit left from one and more from another. 

There are bound to be small dribbles left which are unusable. The smaller the vials the more waste will add up.

Loads not turning up for their jab appointments.

A guy I know who lives in Leicester took his wife (80+) for hers last week and they did his too as so many hadn’t turned up.

It should be made mandatory.

3 hours ago, Ani said:

Vaccine was not developed using a free market economy (Oxford one) 

Injecting Kyle does not have same impact as Enid. 
 

?

42 minutes ago, Dr. Feelgood said:

It's correct. To get 5 guaranteed doses you have to have a tad more available in the vial.

What's left may not be a complete dose ... & you can hardly take a bit left from one and more from another. 

There are bound to be small dribbles left which are unusable. The smaller the vials the more waste will add up.

I understand that, but if there enough left over to give a sixth, are they putting a little more in than is absolutely necessary?

Chap was involved in the vaccination process, and didn't talk about 5.5 doses or similar but 6+.

That's approaching 20% of the vials' content wasted. Seems high.

5 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

?

The Oxford vaccine was developed with a specific objective to provide supply across the world rather than for profit maximisation. 
The Oxford Uni team are not a traditional ‘big pharma’ research group, although daresay they do work for them. 
Point was in reply to the free market comments earlier. It is about saving lives not maximising profits. 

2 hours ago, Ani said:

The Oxford vaccine was developed with a specific objective to provide supply across the world rather than for profit maximisation. 
The Oxford Uni team are not a traditional ‘big pharma’ research group, although daresay they do work for them. 
Point was in reply to the free market comments earlier. It is about saving lives not maximising profits. 

Theres an interesting article on the FT I saw, CEO of Pfizer stating that there are mutaul agreements in teh contracts with governements that neither side will sell the vaccine to the private healthcare side, untill all the vulnerable cases have had been offered a dose.

found it

https://www.ft.com/content/1b8def75-9b44-4a62-991e-2711b5c578c2

Quote

Most private clinics are not expecting to offer coronavirus inoculations at least until the NHS has completed the first phase of its public programme. This initial rollout will prioritise everyone aged 50 or over, health and social care workers and people with underlying medical conditions that put them at higher risk of serious Covid-19 symptoms.

 

 

Edited January 10, 20215 yr by ZiggyStardust
Found the article.

17 hours ago, Ani said:

The Oxford vaccine was developed with a specific objective to provide supply across the world rather than for profit maximisation. 
The Oxford Uni team are not a traditional ‘big pharma’ research group, although daresay they do work for them. 
Point was in reply to the free market comments earlier. It is about saving lives not maximising profits. 

Thats fair enough.

It was very much developed by the free market though. The expertise, equipment and people is funded and furthered by profit.