Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: Petrochemicals on 13/01/2021 18:39:10
-
Sweden is doing well at the moment in relation to corona, low cases low mortality.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
Yet some outlets continue to broadcast the abject failure of sweden
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9126087/amp/Sweden-gets-tough-coronavirus-new-law-close-shops-limit-gatherings-deaths-soar.html
And a non joke news source
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-cases/swedish-covid-19-cases-cross-500000-mark-as-hospitals-near-limit-idUSKBN29H1MQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-cases-idUSKBN29A1F4
-
Sweden is doing well at the moment in relation to corona, low cases low mortality.
They have the 24th highest per capita death rate of the 221 places on worldometer.
So, roughly 9 out of 10 places are doing better.
Please explain how you came to the conclusion that they are
doing well at the moment in relation to corona
They are within a factor of 2 or so of the UK and USA, so they certainly aren't doing anything specially well.
The Daily Fail is a right wing propaganda sheet and will lie about Left wing democracies like Sweden.
Reuters are reporting that, as the number of cases rises, the government is planning to do something about it.
Hardly news but certainly not "fake news"
-
What metric are you using to define "low cases" and "low mortality"?
-
What metric are you using to define "low cases" and "low mortality"?
Other countries figures, Sweden at present averaging 5000 cases and 25 deaths, versus UK or US or any other of the big hitters. Scaling for UK population we have 30,000 cases and 150 victims, figures that the uk is at present envious of at 50000+ and 1000+.
It's not just this that is questionable as fake news there are downright lies, the headline reads
Sweden registers 7,187 new COVID-19 cases, 171 deaths
Or there is
The country of 10 million inhabitants registered 234 new deaths since Friday
Over a 3 day period they would have been unlikely to register 100
-
Other countries figures
That's what I did.
They have the 24th highest per capita death rate of the 221 places on worldometer.
So, roughly 9 out of 10 places are doing better.
Please explain how you came to the conclusion that they are
the headline reads
It does now because you edited your post, but it didn't before.
Why try to change history?
Also, on what basis are you saying that the headline is wrong.
Did you nip over to Sweden and count them?
The country of 10 million inhabitants registered 234 new deaths since Friday
Over a 3 day period they would have been unlikely to register 100
Again; what are you basing your numbers on?
-
Statistics is like space-time. The deck of wild cards. All players can select their own hand.
-
Sweden is doing well at the moment in relation to corona, low cases low mortality.
Yet some outlets continue to broadcast the abject failure of sweden
In 2019 I had the privilege of visiting several of the Nordic (ex-Viking) countries
- I get the impression from my brief visit that these countries have more of an attitude of "we're in this together, let's cooperate"
- Plus, I work for a Finnish company
- They appear to be more trusting of the government, and less prone to idolization of capitalism and strident individualism than (say) USA or UK
So when the Swedish government recommended taking care with COVID (especially for aged care), I expect that the people listened and acted
- The comparison of interest is that the Swedish government did not insist on a lockdown
- While its Scandinavian neighbors did have a lockdown
- So the most appropriate comparisons for Sweden would be Norway, Denmark, Iceland and Finland
Sweden has realized that it's not doing as well as its neighbours, and is changing policy...
-
In 2019 I had the privilege of visiting several of the Nordic (ex-Viking) countries
- I get the impression from my brief visit that these countries have more of an attitude of "we're in this together, let's cooperate"
The nordic countries with their attitude are far more happy and willing to pay tax, they understand its for the provision of services. Rather than bleeding the health are system to death over 10 years so when a problem came along there was nothing to deal with it, they had adequate health care provision. So it would be an unfair comparison also to state that "Sweden has only 20 percent of its ICU beds avaliable when these are the original bed provision that is always avaliable without cancelled operations or bed creation. The same can be said for Germany or Korea or Japan, all of which didn't do too badly. I suppose the spending on health are translates to track and trace as well!
-
Quote
The country of 10 million inhabitants registered 234 new deaths since Friday
Over a 3 day period they would have been unlikely to register 100
Average registered COVID death rate in Sweden this year to date is about 75 per day. You can't usefully interpret any "3 day" period because there are so many public holidays when registries are closed. 423 deaths registered on 2 January compared with 14 the day before and 15 the day after simply does not make epidemiological sense!
-
on what basis are you saying that the headline is wrong.
Did you nip over to Sweden and count them?
-
And more
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19021601.good-morning-britain-piers-morgan-grills-brandon-lewis-uk-covid-death-rate/
Sweden being listed as around 150 deaths a day, yet the WHO disagree. It smells of propaganda.
https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se
-
Sweden being listed
on what basis are you saying that the headline is wrong.
Did you nip over to Sweden and count them?
-
Apples and oranges.
Vaccination prevents those who are vaccinated from getting ill if infected. It doesn't treat existing infection.
Attributable death happens to people who were infected but not vaccinated some time in the last year.
AFAIK Piers Morgan is not an expert in anything, so it isn't surprising if his questions are meaningless.
Brandon Lewis is a lawyer and a government minister, so it isn't surprising if his answers are meaningless.
-
AFAIK Piers Morgan is not an expert in anything, so it isn't surprising if his questions are meaningless.
Asking why we have the highest death rate in the world is not a meaningless question, even if the actual data is fishy.
The answer seems to be that other countries don't have Boris.
-
And more
‘Too little, too late’
Last Friday, 10 months after the pandemic hit, parliament finally granted the government the powers it would need to shut private businesses such as shops, gyms and sports halls.
A week later, it hasn’t used them, despite one of the fastest rates of virus spread in Europe.
www.politico.eu/article/sweden-social-democrats-stefan-lofven-coronavirus-critics/amp/
-
Asking why we have the highest death rate in the world is not a meaningless question,
It's also a bit pointless. There being no treatment for COVID, its lethality is independent of geography or government.
We have the highest death rate because we have the highest infection rate, which is entirely attributable to geography and government policy.
Problem is that deaths make headlines, and journalists and politicians feed on headlines.
The question that needs to be answered is who is to blame for consistently putting "the economy" before public safety, and thereby destroying both?
-
The question that needs to be answered is who is to blame for consistently putting "the economy" before public safety, and thereby destroying both?
That's the same question but, as you pointed out, it makes headlines better if framed in terms of deaths.
So another interesting question is why the news articles are not full of questions about Boris killing thousands by being incompetent.
-
I think it goes beyond incompetence. I'm looking at the legal position of a class action for corporate manslaughter or negligent homicide (discharging infectious patients into nursing homes) . The US impeachment proceedings actually provide a useful precedent regarding indirect incitement to behavior likely to endanger others ("have a family Christmas").
The problem with questioning a politician on "why do we have a high death rate" is the simple answer "because we have a high infection rate", which is true and implies that it's the fault of the public or some historical infrastructure anomaly, and the result is not under the control of government.
Asking "who is to blame for the high infection rate" demands either explicitly blaming the public (which can damage your popularity with the voters) or naming a few names. And you can't wriggle out of it by blaming a mutation because (a) at worst, that only increases R by about 0.15 and (b) the most significant mutation appeared in Kent and is thus almost certainly the result of poor control at the Channel ports.
-
An interesting article here (especially the graph at the bottom of the page):
https://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/ethics/dont-be-too-quick-to-judge-swedens-covid19-policy
It shows that without a lockdown, Sweden took longer to get COVID under control, compared to other European countries.
In contrast, in 2020 the USA never really made a serious attempt to get COVID-19 under control
- On his last day in office, Donald Trump achieved a significant milestone: In just 10 months he accomplished what took 44 months during the wartime urgency of World War 2: The death of 400,000 Americans.
-
An interesting article here (especially the graph at the bottom of the page):
https://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/ethics/dont-be-too-quick-to-judge-swedens-covid19-policy
It shows that without a lockdown, Sweden took longer to get COVID under control, compared to other European countries.
In contrast, in 2020 the USA never really made a serious attempt to get COVID-19 under control
- On his last day in office, Donald Trump achieved a significant milestone: In just 10 months he accomplished what took 44 months during the wartime urgency of World War 2: The death of 400,000 Americans.
I find the "death of 400,000 Americans" a bit of a headline grabber. Almost all of the people who have died in this pandemic have been sustained over their latter lives by medical support, be it through medical support in the form of medications or flu jabs etc. Statistics like this beg the question should we shut down for influenza because this would save 100000 lives a year in the USA? Why do we not ban peanuts and sesame seeds, eradicate all the bees as these are known killers too! The lockdowns where ment to keep the hospitals from overload, not prevent the natural progression of life. The USA war dead would have survived without the flu jab, we have built a large aging populace with such supports but people are surprised what happens when the support is removed.
Imagine you where a fit cancer patient in April 2020, who had incurable cancer. They receive a letter telling them to isolate as they are vulnerable and are not allowed to go out and enjoy themselves. Now fast forward to April 2021. They recieve their jab, and are free to go out. Unfortunately the cancer has spread over Christmas and they are no longer able to leave their house. The good news is they are going to live immobile another year until 2022. They are dispondent and depressed and make orders of the do not recusitate like other people in care homes already have. Thankfully we have saved the person from enjoying themselves in their final years and they can join the raft of other people who do not wish to be recussitated. Quality of life years versus longevity are something to be considered.
I can only think much of the drama over death toll is from people who have no knowledge of the end of life care and quality of life. The value of you life is what it means to you, there are people who can survive but wish not to.
-
magine you where a fit cancer patient
Let's start with a simpler exercise. Imagine a four-sided triangle.
-
Imagine you where a fit cancer patient in April 2020, who had incurable cancer. They receive a letter telling them to isolate as they are vulnerable and are not allowed to go out and enjoy themselves.
And, because they are sensible, they ignore it.
What is the government going to do about it? Execute them?
-
magine you where a fit cancer patient
Let's start with a simpler exercise. Imagine a four-sided triangle.
Again you show your lack of knowledge, reasonableness and empathy. I have known leukemia patients manage their condition for 25 years and live to 95. Is it hitler again Alan?
-
Is it hitler again
It never was.
-
There is a considerable difference between advising people who are immunocompromised (or suffering from cardiac or respiratory disease) to strenuously avoid contact with potential sources of COVID infection, and imposing a statutory curfew on practically everyone to prevent the general spread of the disease.
Given the infectivity of COVID, and the general expectation that anyone seriously affected will be treated in a hospital, it could be considered antisocial for a person who knows he is particularly susceptible to expose himself to infection, because in so doing he is placing a burden on the health service and putting his carers at elevated risk. This is an order of magnitude more antisocial than skiing or overdosing on heroin because the treatment for a broken leg or overdose does not put NHS staff in danger.
-
So another interesting question is why the news articles are not full of questions about Boris killing thousands by being incompetent.
Because the predominantly socialist Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Telegraph, and red-to-the core BBC and ITV....oh dear. My resident apoplectic Tory back bencher, having voted to defund the Beeb and control the Press, seems to have lost his own argument.
-
The only legal and justifiable quarantine enforcement by legal means, as in that at the ports is working as you would expect.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9162883/Coronavirus-UK-Border-Force-fine-30-arrivals-500-not-having-negative-Covid-test.html
January 25, over 3 months since the problem became apparent, still a waste of time.
-
The problem was apparent in 2019. Wuhan seems to have solved it by quarantine, just like everyone else who took it seriously.
-
An independent think-tank (the Lowy Institute) tried to rank the COVID response of various countries....
Comparing the ranking of Nordic countries:
Iceland 7
Finland 17
Norway 18
Denmark 23
Sweden 37
Comparing the primarily English-speaking countries:
New Zealand 1
Australia 8
Canada 61
UK 66
USA 94
An interesting comment from one of the investigators:
- It seems that countries with populations < 10 million seemed to do better, perhaps because they could pivot more flexibly.
- One reason Australia performed so well is because health is handled on a state-by-state basis, so each state acted like an independent country with border controls; each state has a population < 10 million
- Megacities with population > 10 million are hotspots. I guess that's why the mayor of New York had to act on his own.
Play with the statistics here:
https://interactives.lowyinstitute.org/features/covid-performance/
-
Nicely presented but a bit superficial.
Knowing that the vector (outside of Wuhan) is human, the key factors in transmission must surely be population density and intercity commuting. Back in the good old days, villages would shut the gates to keep the plague at bay, but whilst very few people commute regularly between, say, Sydney and Brisbane, or New York and Chicago, it's no big deal to live in Manchester and go to Birmingham or Liverpool once a week for fun, profit, or a lungful of whatever is fashionable.
There are more cats in London than people in Sweden, which has twice the land area of the UK, so the incidence of COVID in Sweden seems to belie the stereotype of a reserved and distant population - was there a national barn dance?
-
An independent think-tank (the Lowy Institute) tried to rank the COVID response of various countries....
Comparing the ranking of Nordic countries:
Iceland 7
Finland 17
Norway 18
Denmark 23
Sweden 37
Comparing the primarily English-speaking countries:
New Zealand 1
Australia 8
Canada 61
UK 66
USA 94
An interesting comment from one of the investigators:
- It seems that countries with populations < 10 million seemed to do better, perhaps because they could pivot more flexibly.
- One reason Australia performed so well is because health is handled on a state-by-state basis, so each state acted like an independent country with border controls; each state has a population < 10 million
- Megacities with population > 10 million are hotspots. I guess that's why the mayor of New York had to act on his own.
Play with the statistics here:
https://interactives.lowyinstitute.org/features/covid-performance/
For the happiest places on earth the nordic countries have a suicide problem. Better these days but if lockdowns rock the boat it could lead to an upswing again. At 1000 extra suicides a year in Finland in 1990 could really mount up, considering that would scale to 12000 suicides in Britain per year.
As a balance I will say that I do not know of other deaths related to depression, drug alcohol bad health, but if the swedes are saved from mental illness by being relaxed, you have to reconsider.
-
An independent think-tank (the Lowy Institute) tried to rank the COVID response of various countries....
Comparing the ranking of Nordic countries:
Iceland 7
Finland 17
Norway 18
Denmark 23
Sweden 37
Comparing the primarily English-speaking countries:
New Zealand 1
Australia 8
Canada 61
UK 66
USA 94
An interesting comment from one of the investigators:
- It seems that countries with populations < 10 million seemed to do better, perhaps because they could pivot more flexibly.
- One reason Australia performed so well is because health is handled on a state-by-state basis, so each state acted like an independent country with border controls; each state has a population < 10 million
- Megacities with population > 10 million are hotspots. I guess that's why the mayor of New York had to act on his own.
Play with the statistics here:
https://interactives.lowyinstitute.org/features/covid-performance/
For the happiest places on earth the nordic countries have a suicide problem. Better these days but if lockdowns rock the boat it could lead to an upswing again. At 1000 extra suicides a year in Finland in 1990 could really mount up, considering that would scale to 12000 suicides in Britain per year.
As a balance I will say that I do not know of other deaths related to depression, drug alcohol bad health, but if the swedes are saved from mental illness by being relaxed, you have to reconsider.
For further balance, up until new year, only 377 people who where in good health beneath 60 had died of corona, if we scale this for Finland it gives us 35 people under 60, if we say only 5 percent of the populace have contracted corona virus it total 700.
-
Death isn't the measure of the harm of COVID. It makes political headlines but, particularly among the over-80 cohort, has very little impact compared with chronic disability at any age.
Anyway if you want to compare deaths, the UK total for 2020 was about 7,000 suicides and 100,000 COVID deaths. In a "normal" year the figures would be about 6000 and 0 respectively. The effect of relaxing quarantine restrictions too early can be seen by looking at the January 2021 figures: 30,000 COVID deaths in one month, attributable to Christmas alone.
-
Balance again
https://www.statista.com/statistics/911228/drug-related-deaths-number-finland/
https://nordan.org/finland-sharp-increase-in-drug-experimentation-from-one-generation-to-another-nearly-half-experiment-with-drugs/
https://www.stat.fi/til/ksyyt/2018/ksyyt_2018_2019-12-16_tie_001_en.html
So suicides are down but drugs are up, read into that what you will, maybe drugs are helping people cope, perhaps a good shot of vallium isn't such a bad thing.
-
The data you quote ceases in 2018, so has nothing to do with COVID quarantine.
And remember that suicide is a solution, not a problem.
-
The data you quote ceases in 2018, so has nothing to do with COVID quarantine.
And remember that suicide is a solution, not a problem.
For balance of suicide rates versus drug dependancy mortality and usage, basically the picture is suicides down, drugs up. Probably more toward the uk situation, so the suicide rate in Finland was not that high in the 1990s if taken in consideration that they had far lower drug use. Drug use is a problem because it isn't controlled, by prohibition or allowance.
-
Drug use is only a problem if you make it one. As long as he doesn't drive under the influence, it is of no concern to me what anyone shoves up his nose or in his veins, but as long as the supply is illegal the police waste time and resources chasing dealers, and users often resort to crime to pay for the stuff. If clean stuff was available over the counter to registered users, it would boost the economy of Afghanistan and Colombia and put a lot of very nasty people out of business. Tax cocaine, heroin and marijuana like alcohol and tobacco and let the money flow into public services instead of criminal lifestyles.
-
There is a considerable difference between advising people who are immunocompromised (or suffering from cardiac or respiratory disease) to strenuously avoid contact with potential sources of COVID infection, and imposing a statutory curfew on practically everyone to prevent the general spread of the disease.
Given the infectivity of COVID, and the general expectation that anyone seriously affected will be treated in a hospital, it could be considered antisocial for a person who knows he is particularly susceptible to expose himself to infection, because in so doing he is placing a burden on the health service and putting his carers at elevated risk. This is an order of magnitude more antisocial than skiing or overdosing on heroin because the treatment for a broken leg or overdose does not put NHS staff in danger.
This is what an oncologist has to say about omicron panic, an oncologist treats, cancer patients. He has direct experience of the affects of panic.
-
The media are very quick to advertise news that supports a position, yet do not mention when this turns out to be incorrect. Manaus was vilified for herd immunity
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/brazil-manaus-coronavirus-mass-graves
but now,
[ Invalid Attachment ]
Completely dropped off, for a population of the amazonas its about 50 cases per million. Compared to the uk's 1,000 per population, it speaks that herd immunity must work.
-
it speaks that herd immunity must work.
I have pointed out before that "herd immunity" means letting the susceptible die.
The reported death toll (per capita) in Brazil is roughly 50% higher than the UK, and I'm not sure how robust Brazilian reporting is.
-
Herd immunity is why we have a plague of grey squirrels and red squirrels are almost extinct.
-
an oncologist treats, cancer patients. He has direct experience of the affects of panic.
Are you saying that panic causes cancer? Does the Nobel Committee know about your research?
-
This is what an oncologist has to say about omicron panic
Yes, but he's saying it on GBN, so ...
He's described as an oncologist- which is, as you point out, a cancer specialist- and an infectious disease specialist- which pretty much rules out a specialism in cancer because cancers pretty much aren't infectious (you might catch one from an identical twin, I think).
He bangs on about how the omicron variant is less lethal- which is probably true. But he ignores the fact that the more cases of it we have, the more likely it is to evolve into something more lethal.
Then he rehashes the idea that " viruses become less lethal with time".
That's true, but the mechanism isn't that the virus has read the text books and realises that it should be less lethal.
The reason is that, where a mutation makes the virus more lethal, it kills all the localhosts and wipes itself out.
So the mechanism for what's seen as this great "saviour" is actually a lot of dead people.
He's misrepresenting that as being a good thing.
And he thinks Californians are the same as Floridians...
Do you understand how a man with dubious expertise, misrepresenting epidemiology on a z list TV channel manages the difficult achievement of being less credible than Boris?
I wonder if he has a patent on T-cell vaccines.
-
an oncologist treats, cancer patients. He has direct experience of the affects of panic.
Are you saying that panic causes cancer? Does the Nobel Committee know about your research?
Stress does cause cancer, directly and through bad living, but what the doctor oncologist said is this blind panic is causing nesesarry consultations, treatments and investigations in many life threatening conditions to be put on hold, giving corona presidence over things such as cancer.
-
an oncologist treats, cancer patients. He has direct experience of the affects of panic.
Are you saying that panic causes cancer? Does the Nobel Committee know about your research?
Stress does cause cancer, directly and through bad living, but what the doctor oncologist said is this blind panic is causing nesesarry consultations, treatments and investigations in many life threatening conditions to be put on hold, giving corona presidence over things such as cancer.
Do you understand what is actually happening?
Here's what a doctor said about it on facebook.
1) GPs are already seeing patients face to face, and have been throughout the pandemic. There are over a million primary care consults EVRY DAY in England, and nearly 60% are face to face.
2) One of the issues is that in the middle of a pandemic, with Covid cases on the rise, we should be able to decide which cases need to be seen face to face, using triage, for the safety of both our patients and our staff.
3) The other main issue is the lack of GPs and the pathetic inaction of the government to address the problem. Demand has gone through the roof recently and there simply aren't enough GPs to provide safe medical care.
4) The main response from the government is 'Here is an extra £3 per patient. See everyone face to face. We'll have league tables and publicly shame the bottom 25% of surgeries of people doing face to face appointments. Oh, and you need to tell your patients how much you earn.' None of this does anything to improve the care patients get.
5) The government somehow think that the problem can be solved by employing locum doctors. Just not foreign ones, because Brexit has removed their free movement. Just not the current ones, because they're already working flat-out, too. So there are probably some hidden somewhere, who aren't working, who can magically start working if Sad Jav wishes hard enough or something. And somehow this £3 per patient can pay the average locum sessional rate.
6) Lastly, there is no chance that GPs will 'walk-out' and the media know this. Industrial action will probably take the form of 'not declaring our earnings' or 'stop doing non-contractual work' or 'carry on triaging patients before appointments' - hardly something that is going to massively affect patient care.
So, when you see stories on the BBC, whose corporate bollocks are already in a fist-like grasp by the government, or on the websites of newspapers who sell advertising space to private medical companies, or on the social media pages of adult toddlers who think that forcing GPs to work 100 hours per week and cutting their pay will solve the Primary Care crisis, have a think. Have a think about the causes this situation. Have a think about how it has been allowed to develop. And have a think about whether you think the proposed solutions by Sad Jav will actually make any difference.
-
It isn't public panic that is reducing staff availabiltiy for other diseases, but the disease itself.
It is generally not a good idea to expose patients to infectious disease. Look what happened when a corrupt and incompetent Health Secretary insisted that hospitals should discharge infectious patients to unprotected nursing homes - he killed 60,000 perfectly healthy people. So hospitals insist that any actually or probably infected staff members take leave, and as hospital attendances rise, so the ability to treat anyone for anything decreases.
The answer to many questions is the same: don't wait to see how the fire spreads - if you smell smoke, land the plane. Not panic, just common sense.
-
It isn't public panic that is reducing staff availabiltiy for other diseases, but the disease itself.
It is generally not a good idea to expose patients to infectious disease. Look what happened when a corrupt and incompetent Health Secretary insisted that hospitals should discharge infectious patients to unprotected nursing homes - he killed 60,000 perfectly healthy people. So hospitals insist that any actually or probably infected staff members take leave, and as hospital attendances rise, so the ability to treat anyone for anything decreases.
The answer to many questions is the same: don't wait to see how the fire spreads - if you smell smoke, land the plane. Not panic, just common sense.
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
This is all very fascinating, but the cock is crowing when it suits him at present. I haven't seen any news that states "mira le in the amazon, Manaus super city against Corona". One does have to wonder whether the media is fair and impartial or complete utter deceivers pushing their own agenda.
-
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 14:54:23
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
This is all very fascinating, but the cock is crowing when it suits him at present. I haven't seen any news that states "mira le in the amazon, Manaus super city against Corona". One does have to wonder whether the media is fair and impartial or complete utter deceivers pushing their own agenda.
Well, obviously I didn't say what that quote claims I did.
And the rest of his post makes no sense.
I wonder if he even looked at Portuguese language news or news from Brazil. That might be more reliable
Anyway, here's what the English language news said about the city
"The health system in Manaus, the capital of Amazonas state, in northwestern Brazil, has collapsed for the second time. Although hospitals have tried to keep up by adding more COVID-19 bed capacity and oxygen, the number of new patients with the coronavirus has continued to grow, leaving the entire health system overwhelmed and on the brink of collapse."
https://www.france24.com/en/video/20210204-second-wave-of-covid-19-hits-manaus-region-hard
And the current state of affaires is that they are vaccinating as fast as they can.
https://diaadianoticia.com.br/manaus-tera-22-pontos-de-vacinacao-contra-a-covid-19-funcionando-neste-sabado-18/
-
One does have to wonder whether the media is fair and impartial or complete utter deceivers pushing their own agenda.
I have little faith in the meeja, but I've been engaged recently in testing mobile MRI and CT units for Nightingale hospitals. Each time I ask the customer when they want the work done, the answer comes back "yesterday". You don't spend most of a million quid in a hurry for fun.
-
You don't spend most of a million quid in a hurry for fun.
Apparently you do it so you can "be seen to be doing something".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56327214
-
Preferably not seen to be doing it. The East London Nightingale site was bought (at your expense) from a group who could not make any money from an exhibition centre under lockdown. I wonder which political party they support?
Anyway it kept the army busy for a few weeks.