Hancock's announcement of funding to accelerate the seemingly promising vaccine research at Oxford — do we cut him some slack for that?

Looking for positives.

depends on what his involvement in that is doesnt it?

These tests are being carried out by Oxford University. Be interesting to see how far these tests have actually gone.

Cant help thinking its another deflection tactic. They have cried wolf too often recently.

And what have the government done to assist the Uni?

What can they do other than give them money and let them get on with it.

Nothing, hence they dont get the credit for it.

Can we really all go back to normal life without a vaccine?

It’s happening all over the World it doesn’t mean a vaccination is anywhere near close to being available. At this stage it slightly smacks of trying to give people false hope that this is ending anytime soon this solely is the science and experts we are relying on apart from providing money I don’t see what Hancock has to do with this;

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.co ... ally%3famp

Of course but the article says an actually available vaccination is unlikely before 2021.

Don't know what article you are referring to then.

"Other projections have been even more optimistic, with Oxford University vaccinology professor Sarah Gilbert telling the Times of London that in a best-case scenario her team could have a vaccine ready by fall 2020."

Oh and the money is for the trials, not for the whitecoats.

I think if we get a vaccine before 2021 that would be pretty remarkable, in 2021 would probably be one of the fastest, if not the fastest, it has ever been achieved. They say the normal time is about five years. There was a guy on the telly this morning saying eight to ten years is not uncommon. To get clinical testing on humans in a matter months is unknown.
Best of luck to all concerned both here and globally.
I am prepared to take part in any trials if required.

Probably the article I read before and didn’t post a link to

Still it’s a lengthy process and that’s a best case scenario.

Still it’s a lengthy process and that’s a best case scenario.[/quote]
do not mind it being a lengthy process as long as its fit for purpose in the end. the last thing we need is one that is rushed out with big side effects.

There's never been a need for a vaccine quite as quickly as we do now in the modern age. With the world's experts all simultaneously working on one, and with cross party cooperation I remain hopeful we'll have one sooner than expected. There's a lot of supremely intelligent people out there and I have faith in them to provide a solution to allow us to overcome this pandemic.

This is what I tell myself to keep myself sane anyway.

Christ the first vaccine was discovered because Edward Jenner cottoned on that milk maids weren't getting ill with smallpox because they'd already caught cowpox, a much milder strain of the virus, leaving them immune. I'll take a happy accident like that again.

I'm trying to avoid ad hominem judgements here. I agree that Hancock has mostly seemed comical. So let's just call him by his first name Tony (yay another boomer reference) to keep his identity secret..

“Nothing about the process is certain,” Tony said. And it wasn't Tony who gave any dates, apart from when the money would be made available (namely 21/04/2020)

If people aren't ready to accept this news as positive and cautious, it's beginning to sound as though they really have got in in for the government after all.
Hell I'VE got it in for the government, but black isn't the only colour paintbrush I have.

Imagine if he’d have refused to stump up the cash!?

Nobody is not going to see this as positive news but I’m not sure what Hancock deserves credit for? Answering the biggest no brainer in history correctly?

Sorry sir but that's a bit over the top. A bit like your comments about someone using the word boomer.

There wont be one person alive not ecstatic at the news of a vaccine.

If there is then they are mental.

All I am saying is that why would you applaud Hancock for that when its oxford university doing the testing?

Theoretically, if it took 8 to 10 years to Fully test and approve a vaccine How many lives, at the current rate worldwide, would be lost, or how many would be left?

We all applauded the chancellor for his efforts. Or does that not count?

I didn't say to applaud Tony. I said to cut him some slack in this instance as he might just have done the right thing.

Who is applauding hancock i couldnt give a rats arse about credit i just want a vaccine

I couldn’t hazard a guess.

I just gave my 7 year old the scenario and asked him the question if it’s right to give them money for this testing.

He got the answer right. Mind he also did when I asked him about open borders and mass gatherings.

Hancock is Secretary of State for health and Social Care.

PJ brush up on your analogies please. I'm pretty sure it wasn't your 7-year old's idea to finance the testing.

I asked if he would have in these circumstances.

I can’t repeat his answer when I asked if it was wise to walk around covid-19 hospitals shaking people’s hands.

Enjoy your day Poolies, I have to work!

My thoughts on the vaccine.

I know that the relevant parts of my University turned their focus to work on Covid-19 before the lockdown started. Indeed, while our University is closed (I'm not allowed into my office, for any reason) there is an exception for those working on this. There's also something really positive that Oxford is leading this; they'll undoubtedly be working with others outside the University, sharing data, ideas, results etc. Big Pharma, by comparison, is usually very secretive, as they want to develop medicines that help their bottom line; it's a race for a patent that matters to them, not a race to the outcome.

And yes, the government should get credit here. Getting research funding of any amount (the last grant I had was only for £44000) is a long and tortuous process that usually takes months. There are lots of hurdles; peer review, panel scrutiny, being asked to review and resubmit your proposal etc. It looks like all that has been swept aside. It's only a small thing, and the sensible thing to do, but they still should be applauded, even if only for doing the sane thing. That may be a low bar for praise, but that's how low they've set it given their performance so far.

There was a good interview on the Andrew Marr show lat Sunday with Professor Sarah Gilbert of Oxford University. It starts at 16:18 mins at https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m ... w-19042020

Good to read hear that.

Vaccines I'm told usually take a year or two to create, therefore you have to be sceptical about a one created within a few months , here's hoping though , fingers crossed.

As for Tony and the government in general , they've had a rough couple of weeks , and maybe they have just got over a hump and a period of calm may ensue between now and the end of the month .Then the shit will hit the fan again when it comes out we have failed miserably to hit the 100,000 tests a day target set by Tony at the beginning of the month.

Hopefully Boris will be fit and well by then and ride in to the rescue and provide us with the leadership the government are desperately missing

There's your answer.

Coronavirus is a zoonotic virus. Let's give it cows, then we can suck on the teats a bit and see what happens.

For furriners without Iplayer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-S_Pqt1A_I

The cowpox in this instance is MERS.

Correct and SARS

18,100 have died now. Officially.

It's an horrendous number and one this country should be ashamed of.

I'm gonna go full Salvador Dali and get myself a pet anteater and see how that goes.

I'm sure they probably sell them on Amazon.

You have to shag them before you eat them to be sure the process works so check that you don't order a spiny anteater by accident.

650 have died in care homes in scotland just this week. What that says about england and longer period is frightening.

I know very little about the testing process but every day I feel more like the last few weeks have been all about the government trying mislead and cover their own backs. The figures they are quoting for tests aren’t even the amount of people who have been tested as many have been tested more than once but every test is counted in the statistics. They seem less efficient in counting every death. Also they are trying to backtrack and talk about testing capacity rather than actually tests done.

Even the bed capacity line and the NHS not being overwhelmed I have some doubts about, obviously they have done a good job setting up all of this field hospitals in quick time but some of these (everything crossed like the North East one) will never be used, are these spare beds in less effected areas sugarcoating the stats again? Are these field hospitals classed as critical care beds? Does anyone know?


https://twitter.com/dhscgovuk/status/12 ... 15809?s=21

Was it Hancock or someone else yesterday who re-iterated that they would definitely reach 100,000 tests a day by the end of the month?

In my view that was a glorious opportunity to admit the initial target was a tad ambitious and a chance to admit maybe they may not reach it , I don't think people would make a big thing of that , on the contrary a bit of honesty would be seen as refreshing , but no, they dig an even deeper hole for themselves. I hope they do reach the target , not for the governments sake but for the sake of the population , but it does come across rather like a football manager whose team loses every week , yet wont stop telling the supporters the are still going to get promoted.

Its almost like the likes of Hancock want to be proven wrong and subsequently sacked.

Also if we have all of this spare bed capacity why are thousands dying in care homes without being given a chance of hospital treatment?

To quote the real man running the country:

"protect the economy, and if that means some pensioners die, too bad"

The capacity thing is a similar thing they did with something else last year - my memory is really bad but there was something last year they changed the goalposts on.

Its unreal that only Piers Morgan appears to be challenging them on it.

Its utterly disgraceful how weak the BBC are being.

Depends which bit of the BBC. The guy from outside source on the BBC news channel did an interesting thing last night; he spliced together a load of clips from press conferences and interviews (the, 'we never said that' type) with minimal commentary in between. He largely left the viewer to make up their own mind, but the message was obvious; they're obfuscating.

And there's the rub. Saving their own skin should be about 798th on the list of priorities that they allocate their energy to, and that's being generous.

I don’t know enough to form an opinion. Mr Farman has direct and current experience so I’ll take his view.

Wouldnt mind seeing that.

I've seen videos of the swab test. Does not look at all pleasant.

Out of curiosity what is the essential service you work in?

Also I hope the test you took was as a precaution because of the area of work you operate in as opposed to feeling any symptoms.

A friend of mine's dad received the news he was positive for coronavirus today, he's a care worker. I think that is the first instance of someone I know directly having contracted it.

Hope it is the right result, Phil. Good luck.

I don't quite get that. Surely they need people that haven't had it? Am I having a dumb moment here?

Ah I see. Good. Thought I was going mad there.

Read their names.
Don't stand there reciting your hashtags about 'flattening the curve' and 'following the science'.
Read their names.
686 died in hospitals today alone.
The real number in care homes, prisons, and bedrooms is much higher.
Read their names.
You can get through roughly 20 in a minute.
100 every five minutes.
Read their names.
Today's deaths should take you just short of an hour.
Each name had family and friends and a story like anyone's of love and loss and hard work and hopes and dreams and inspirations.
Each was a life cut short before it's time.
Read their names.
How many have died because YOU failed to act soon enough, putting the economy before their life? How many have died because YOU failed to supply them with PPE? How many have died because ten years of austerity left them weaker and without the will to fight the virus? How many have died because of a shortage of staff or equipment?
Read their f***ing names