Nice spin.Trump dumped responsibly on the the states to distribute the vaccine because he was to lazy and incompetent to do it himself.
Thanks ..I did not know that Is that why welfare, medicare and education are also administered by the states Those presidents at that time were also incompetent To finish the logical sequence...all Presidents are incompetent.....we both agree on this
No,we don't agree on that and the feds would do a better job handling most of the things the states do.
Well an amusing note from India regarding COVID misinformation... Indian government says 5G doesn’t cause COVID-19. Also points out India has no 5G networks But won’t reveal who it wants banned from social media over less obvious disinformation https://www.theregister.com/2021/05/11/india_5g_covid_19/
PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs Boris Johnson referred to Covid as 'Kung-Flu', Dominic Cummings will claim when he appears before MPs He will also allege the PM offered to be injected with it live on TV to 'show it's nothing to be scared of' Mr Cummings is expected to be accused by Tory MPs of using an appearance before a select committee to 'avenge' his sacking in November after he lost a power struggle with the PM's partner Carrie Symonds https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...cted-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html (More at above url)
Tens of thousands of lives could have have been saved - top scientists back Dominic Cummings https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...d-have-been-avoided-john-edmunds-b937492.html Dominic Cummings’ central charge against the Government - that delays over imposing lockdowns led to tens of thousands of people dying from Covid-19 unnecessarily - was today backed up by two of Britain’s leading coronavirus experts. Professor John Edmunds, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said a “very large number” of Covid-19 deaths could have been avoided in the second wave if the Government had taken more drastic action as being advised by scientists. In his damning evidence to a joint session of the Commons health and science committees, former No10 top adviser Mr Cummings said on Wednesday: “Tens of thousands of people died who did not need to die.” He tore into Boris Johnson for not taking earlier and more decisive action in the autumn to stop the second wave, and for failings also as the pandemic hit Britain in the spring. Asked whether a death toll running into the tens of thousands could have been avoided, leading epidemiologist Mr Edmunds told ITV show: “Well it depends what measures you put in place, what would be the alternative, but certainly if you did a significant package and you put it in place in September, then we would have averted many of the problems that we then subsequently had over the autumn wave. “And that autumn wave of course fuelled the next wave because we allowed another variant (Kent) to escape and start to spread. So it’s hard to say how many cases and deaths would have been avoided but it’s a very large number.” So far, 127,748 people have died in the UK within 28 days of testing positive for coronavirus, according to the Government’s official figures. Pressed on whether a lockdown in September could have saved tens of thousands of deaths, the disease expert, who sits on the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), explained: “We could have reduced the deaths in the autumn wave by a significant margin, yes, if we’d have taken action. “It wasn’t just a matter of a two-week circuit breaker, that wouldn’t have been sufficient, and that wasn’t what we said, and what SAGE was arguing for in September. “It was a package of measures that had to be pretty stringent to be put in place to keep R at about 1, rather than allowing it to drift off, but also a circuit breaker to bring the incidents down.” Professor Neil Ferguson, from Imperial College London, whose modelling was instrumental in persuading the Government to bring in the first lockdown, said scientists had become increasingly concerned in the week leading up to March 13 2020 about the lack of a clear plan, and 20,000 to 30,000 lives could have been saved with earlier action. “I think that’s unarguable,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “I mean the epidemic was doubling every three to four days in weeks 13th to 23rd of March, and so had we moved the interventions back a week we would have curtailed that and saved many lives”. Asked when SAGE, of which he was a member, determined that a policy of accepting the country had to gain “herd immunity” as part of the strategy would lead to a vast number of deaths, he said a key meeting was held with the NHS on March 1 “which finalised estimates around health impacts, so the week after that really”. Prof Ferguson said he “wasn’t privy to what officials were thinking within Government”, but added: “I would say from the scientific side there was increasing concern that week leading up to the 13 of March about the lack of clear, let’s say, (a) resolved plan of what would happen in the next few days in terms of implementing social distancing.” Mr Johnson ordered the first lockdown on March 23. Asked how influential SAGE was in changing the policy from one of accepting “herd immunity” to one of lockdown, Prof Ferguson said: “I think the key issue... it’s multiple factors, partly the modelling, which had been around for a couple of weeks but became firmer, particularly as we saw data coming in from the UK, and unfortunately I think one of the biggest lessons to learn in such circumstances is we really need good surveillance within the country at a much earlier point than we actually had it back in March last year. “As we saw the data build up, and it was matching the modelling, even worse than the modelling, let’s say it focused minds”. Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick rejected Mr Cummings’ claim that tens of thousands of people died unnecessarily during the pandemic. Asked directly whether he thinks that claim is wrong, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “Yes, I think it is, because you have to remember that we didn’t have all of the facts at the time that the decisions were being taken. “Nobody, I think, could doubt for one moment that the Prime Minister was doing anything other than acting with the best of motives with the information and the advice that was available to him.” Looking to the weeks ahead, Mr Edmunds also sounded a note of caution on whether the Prime Minister should unlock fully on June 21 with the final stage of easing restrictions. “No, I think that would be… At the moment, anyway, it looks a little bit risky,” he said. “You know, the Indian variant is taking off in a number of places - not everywhere, but a number of places. “Luckily we’ve still got low levels, but it is concerning. “And we are still not back to normal, we as I think I mentioned before, we measure people’s contact patterns and we’re still at less than half of our normal contact patterns at the moment.”