Where you are right is that it seems the Eu backed the wrong horse regarding the astra zenica vaccine which they didn't order, putting all their strategy on the oxford one plus a few others that haven't been approved yet. This seems to be why they haven't got many supplies yet.
I see Cyprus is trying to do a side del with Israel, whereas germany clearly saw which way the wind was blowing last autumn!
So the Uk backed the right vaccine and got it ordered early and approved earlier, which is a plus point.
I'm not disagreeing with you that programme in EU countries hasn't got off to as good a start as it has in the UK, its clear it hasn't. However one does have to bear in mind that the UK is achieving its figures by deciding to give one dose instead of the two recommended by the vaccine manufacturers and scientists.
Whether thats a good idea or not I don't know, if it seems if more people get some immunity, that will slow the spread and deaths down so fine, but that approach hasn't been adopted by the EU.
I don't understand your point here, because currently none of the EU countries have given second doses, they only started 3 weeks ago and they're just getting to the point of the second dose.
Interestingly, the Italians have given out more than the German's, I would have expected the Germans to be the most efficient country, including the UK, sadly.
Worryingly, both a survey in the Guardian and actual statistics from our local area health authority in Birmingham, have revealed an acceptance level of less than 50% from the BAME community to take the vaccine. These figures are consistant with the compliance of covid rules throughout the pandemic. It doesn't make sense, as these are the very people who are in more danger.
Why on earth hasn't there been a Panorama type programme investigating this?
Surely it can't be, Swale's, "facts" are inviolate
Ram is right about the second dose thing, its currently an irrelevance performance-wise and another attempt by Swale to burnish up the EU
Actually, it's not quite an irrelevance, because the headline figure for the UK vaccinations is quite often that for the number of people who have been vaccinated. When you add the 500k who have had their second dose, the UK figures are even higher. It's also surprising when the government have a target of the number of people getting vaccinated, that they're are continuing to 'waste' vaccinations on second doses, which don't contribute to their target.
Is this a case for making vaccination mandatory, or should those that refuse be denied NHS treatment if they succomb to COVID after refusal?
https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/...refuse-4898861
It’s a tricky one (no pun intended) - how do you draw the line between those who give reasoned arguments (MA has done so here), total pricks, and the misguided (I’ve noticed media are leaning heavily on ‘south Asian’ (they mean Muslim) reluctance due to rumours of the vaccine containing alcohol and pork extracts, I believe Hindus may be reluctant on the basis of gelatin (false)). Who’s to say which If these factions deserves treatment any more than the other, or any less than vaccine adopters? After all, NHS treat smokers for smoking related illness...
Much as the idea of letting non vaxers go untreated appeals, as Andy says smokers plus alcoholics, the obese, drug takers, people in pub fights, dangerous drivers in accidents etc etc all get treated. The NHS is non discriminatory, so those who chose not to vaccinate are in the same position.
However those who have declined the vax might reasonably be asked why when they turn up at hospital with covid and might be deprioritised in favour of those still in the queue for vax. But it's more admin that the NHS doesn't need.