Chelseafan

3 hours ago, candide said:

It was an emergency authorisation.

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency

11 hours ago, candide said:

The local agencies deal with non-prescription drugs and drugs authorised before the creation of the EMA.

It's more efficient to have a look at the EMA website.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/what-we-do/authorisation-medicines

That's not true, the local agencies and I will use the UK MHRA as an example, are responsible for regulating and authorising of all drugs.

As an example, they authorised the recent pfizer vaccine for use in the UK.

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

The local EMA's are simply taking the main EMA's assertion. All in all the process is now a lot faster than it used to be with individual assessments.

That's my point. What is the point of the local agencies then ? Might as well disband them if all they are doing is following the advise of the central EMA. Two branches doing the same job. Bureaucracy at its finest.

9 hours ago, Hi from France said:

Did you actually understand that the EMA removes bureaucracy but providing a single drug approval system for the single market? 

Did you actually understand what I said ?

If the EMA issues an approval for the single market, it still has to get approval from the BfArm in Germany, ANSM in France, MHRA in UK etc etc.

1 hour ago, Hi from France said:

The EMA does much more than this, the main thing being cutting cost drug companies have by having to win separate approvals from each state. 

 

When a drug company designs a new drug do you really think it will prioritize the UK market authorisation over the EU Centralised marketing authorisation? 

From Wiki

The EMA was set up in 1995, with funding from the European Union and the pharmaceutical industry, as well as indirect subsidy from member states, its stated intention to harmonise (but not replace) the work of existing national medicine regulatory bodies. The hope was that this plan would not only reduce the €350 million annual cost drug companies incurred by having to win separate approvals from each member state but also that it would eliminate the protectionist tendencies of sovereign states unwilling to approve new drugs that might compete with those already produced by domestic drug companies. 

I've highlighted the pertinent points. I suspect if it was disbanded tomorrow it would probably be quicker for pharmaceutical companies to bring their drugs to market as one layer of bureaucracy has been removed.

3 hours ago, Hi from France said:

actually this is the Brits "transnational" vision of Europe limited to the Brexiteers accounting (often bad accounting btw) vision:

Yes if you look at membership fees vs. subsidies, there are countries who contribute more and countries who receive more .. but the EU is still a huge win-win for all, the single market is the best known but only one of many many perks which the UK lost (just replicating the European Medicines Agency (EMA) will cost you €360 million every year).

 

That we have said over and over and over ... Is there any way to get that into your thinking? ???? 

 

.

The EMA was set up to harmonise the work of existing bodies across the EU, whether they have been successful or not is open to interpretation as each countries respective agencies still have their own agenda. One could argue that whilst well-intentioned, the EMA is a waste of tax-payers money.

The UK already has its own agency, the MHRA.

On 12/24/2020 at 4:37 AM, Andy from Kent said:

 

Speed kills.

No it doesn't. Stupid, negligent, carless drivers do.

Thank-you Sir.

My missus and child are due to return to Thailand late February. They already have a flight booked with Qatar but I suspect I will have to rebook them on a repatriated flight

How do I start the process ? Do I have to pay for their quarantine or is it free for Thai nationals ? Do I need to go to the Thai embassy in London or is there a simple online process ?

Thanks

17 hours ago, PGSan said:

Why are they shopping if they do not have to?

But they can't know.

They have to shop in normal social hours like the rest of us.

16 hours ago, Dan O said:

I agree that it makes sense to limit exposure times where ever possible but at an off hour time quarantine has little affect other than an impression you're doing something but actually giving little impact or affect. Nice optic but not much more than that.  True Testing, quarantining and area lock down for travel are far more effective along with truth in reporting 

 

Maybe but I suspect its mainly aimed at the drunks who perhaps want another bottle of whiskey at 3am in the morning and who's decision making process will be impaired.

Totally agree with you on the testing part.

15 hours ago, robbioff said:

Are you sure?

No but common sense says it might be produent to do so.

3 hours ago, Walker88 said:

If you're doing some grocery shopping at 2am, chances are social distancing comes naturally.

 

Instead, you're taking those few folks who might shop after work at 2200 to 0400 and throw them into the crowded hours.

Precisely. "Few". Most of the shops we are talking about are 7-11's, mom/pops and CP. Surely they can plan their shopping a little better rather than walk in at 2am for a bottle of Johnny Walker...

It's an inconvience for sure but it does make sense to close them no matter what you may think.

30 minutes ago, Seeall said:

Maths would say no.... 100 people in one hour vs 10 people per hour for 10 hours?  = EASY

But the 10 people in 10 hours don't have to shop, they can shop in normal hours.

9 hours ago, baboon said:

Why can't these idiots watch what they say? "It's their fault" to the less intelligent means "Feel free to kick their heads in". We need to work together, not apportion blame to one another.

Because it's feeds into the popular agenda...

16 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

 

Pretty easy really, everyone is supposed to be at home during a lockdown. Easy to spot people outside. Essential workers only allowed out - and they should be travelling only at work times. Hospital workers are easy to spot - they have a uniform (I should know, as a medical professional myself!) These working hours should be adjusted to take into account that no one should be leaving home. Police staffing numbers are far more, when you take into account traffic wardens, PCSO, special constables & police volunteers - the number grows to around 230,000 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/905169/police-workforce-mar20-hosb2020.pdf

 

Why not bring the army in? Worked here. That's another 200,000 people patrolling the streets.

 

Just to show how much of a joke the last lockdown was, have a look at this 2 minute BBC News interview during the second lockdown. No one is wearing mask, even the chap from the BBC interviewing everyone doesn't bother to cover his face. The tub of lard he was interviewing was out for essential shopping - cookies. Cookies were essential to this selfish piece of....

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-55050597

<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/embed/p08zcsxw/55050597"></iframe>

 

 

 

You've been in Thailand too long and shielded from reality.

For a start, major retailers are open and people are Christmas shopping albeit in a limited amount of shops. I had to get some food today at my local Tesco and the queue stretched around the carpark, took me 50 minutes to get in. It's pandamonium. Had the government (yes, I've used a lower case 'g' in my contempt) given us a little more notice than we could have planned around it. Even today I still saw people in store not wearing masks. Who the hell is going to stop them? Certainly not the young girl who was marshalling everyone through the store.

As for police officer numbers, you are totally off your trolley. You DO realise that crime continues with or witout Covid but I do agree that the army should be bought in.

But

No government would go to the length of essentially cancelling Christmas if things weren't bad....

33 minutes ago, 2530Ubon said:

No. It hasn’t been done. that’s why the UK is in terrible shape
 

What do you think the police are for? To enforce things. They’re literally called ‘the force’ 

You've obviously not lived here for a long time. The "force" are nothing of the type. More likely to pull you over for slightly driving too fast then solving a real crime.

There are around 125,000 offices in a population of 70+ million, assuming there is no crime between now and Febryary, how the hell do you think they can enforce a curfew? The only real way is to enlist the help of the army but then we're moving into 1984 teritory...

6 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

Enforce social distancing. Massive fines introduced to enforce co-operation such as limiting the amount of customers in a store etc.

 

The last lockdown was a joke. People were on the news laughing saying "I bought cookies - they were essential." Enforce a total lockdown for 3 weeks.Massive fines for non compliance

 

Close bars, gyms, cinemas, non essential shops and nightclubs

 

Enforce mask wearing - everywhere. No more stupid rules, total mask wearing everywhere. Massive fines for non-compliance.

 

Curfew in force - massive fines for non compliance

 

Pretty much follow what the governent here did - it worked. Would still be working if the borders were protected by competent, uncorruptable people.

Most of what you mention has already been done.

Who is going to enforce masking wearing in shops ? who is going to enforce the curfew?

What Thailand did right was that they closed their borders pretty quickly but even now, I see there is a huge increase in infections.

1 hour ago, ThailandRyan said:

And here we go. This should make the baht dive, as the economy will take another hit, either that or we will be in a hyper inflation situation and many people will be going hungry without government intervention.  However, the flip side will be that eventually deflation will give in and prices will be lowered so the items start to sell as there will be a glut on the market.  Roller coaster ride ahead.

The biggest issue at the moment is avaibility of sea-freight containers and port blockages. Felixstowe is on its knees and some shipping companies are refusing to offload in the UK instead routing to Rotterdam.

9 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

 

Before Johnson reversed himself, the scientists were clamouring that it was a terrible idea. He didn't listen. Why would he listen - he was told the tier plan wouldn't work, but hey, it didn't work the first time so let's try it again.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54592112

 

 

 

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/christmas-bubbles-covid-rules-scientists_uk_5fbe1506c5b68ca87f7fea85

 

 

If you have a better idea, one that doesn't destroy the economy further then please enlighten us.

On 11/27/2020 at 2:15 AM, Liverpoolfan said:

How would you like it if i got my garden shears out the shed and went to town on your bonce?

 

leave the kids alone you tyrannical dinosaurs! 

Precisely.

I'm sure his comments were well intentioned but this is just another example of how those in power are so detached from modern society with their Authortorian values that no wonder they are ridiculed the world over.

What Thailand really needs is a young, fresh dynamic, outward-thinking Goverment who can take the country forward. Those currently in power only know one way. The same way as its been for the past 100 years or so.