[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Not our Most Loved trying to escape TiBB on a life raft

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Not our Most Loved trying to escape TiBB on a life raft

It gets worse, when he couldn't buy his way in he stole a child . Inadvertently saving the child's life, to be fair, BUT STILL.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It gets worse, when he couldn't buy his way in he stole a child . Inadvertently saving the child's life, to be fair, BUT STILL.

Not Cal snatching Kaz's baby and taking it out to sea.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Its not like they spent 20 mil knowing they didn't work, they took a gamble which would have paid off if it did work...onwards and upwards

Yes they did know it was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

So, would spending money paying for researching a vaccine also be a complete waste of money if it didn't pan out with a result?

We invested in several anti body tests, it turns out that none of them work. Every country around the world has been buying the same or similar tests, none of them work, so i guess they are all bad guys too

Not even nearly comparable... it's like saying we have a vaccine paying millions for it then finding out its a vaccine for measles not coronavirus. Useless and misleading. No scientist worth anything put their name to these tests as an advocate ... why,? Because it was a pointless exercise and would have been an embarrassing career ending moment. Not fir our govt, we have people cheering every piss poor effort it's just a joke. Which other country? Can you give me a for instance?

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Not even nearly comparable... it's like saying we have a vaccine paying millions for it then finding out its a vaccine for measles not coronavirus. Useless and misleading. No scientist worth anything put their name to these tests as an advocate ... why,? Because it was a pointless exercise and would have been an embarrassing career ending moment. Not fir our govt, we have people cheering every piss poor effort it's just a joke. Which other country? Can you give me a for instance?

literally every country in the world has been buying anti body tests and then trialing them to see if they provide consistent results. All the G7 countries compared notes and none found a viable test after buying them

You need to understand what these tests are ... they are a recipe of chemical components ... so even if the particular recipe didn't work, the components are still items that can be used ... they are not wasted

[Toy Soldier]

Honestly I would understand being annoyed about it if it was 2 billion, even 200 million, but 20 million is such a small amount in terms of government spending its just not worth getting wound up about. Its like being annoyed at your partner for "wasting" 50p on a new flavour of crisps and binning them because they tasted like crap.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Yes they did know it was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

Do you have a link for this claim?

[Toy Soldier]

The idea that they knew for sure they didn't work but bought them anyway is an odd one... For what possible reason? For fun?

Even if it was 50/50 or less that they could find some usable function for them it would be a reasonable gamble.

The idea that they knew 100% that they were useless and just bought them anyway, presumably specifically to annoy people, is a bit of a stretch. I mean yeah the Tories are arseholes but that would be a bit much.

[DouglasS]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Yes they did know it was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

I am asking myself that very question but in regards to your responses

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

literally every country in the world has been buying anti body tests and then trialing them to see if they provide consistent results. All the G7 countries compared notes and none found a viable test after buying them

You need to understand what these tests are ... they are a recipe of chemical components ... so even if the particular recipe didn't work, the components are still items that can be used ... they are not wasted

Where are you getting your information from? Which countries bought tests and how many? Why dont you educate me as to what these componants are that can be used again.......

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Honestly I would understand being annoyed about it if it was 2 billion, even 200 million, but 20 million is such a small amount in terms of government spending its just not worth getting wound up about. Its like being annoyed at your partner for "wasting" 50p on a new flavour of crisps and binning them because they tasted like crap.

It's nothing like that ...for some perspective here's some info on central govt funding cuts and what they mean to local areas.
https://news.leeds.gov.uk/news/final...9-20-announced

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Smithy

As soon as we start getting some good news I’ll post it

Well, fair comment actually.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Do you have a link for this claim?

It's an opinion not a direct quote cherie.

I have posted articles in relation to these useless antibody tests before, I'll post them again if you like it's really easy.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Yes they did know it was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It's an opinion not a direct quote cherie.

I have posted articles in relation to these useless antibody tests before, I'll post them again if you like it's really easy.

That's not an opinion, you are stating it as fact, yes please do post where the government paid 20 million for tests they KNEW wouldn't work

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

Well, fair comment actually.

Yes Smithy is a Sharp Lad

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

That's not an opinion, you are stating it as fact, yes please do post where the government paid 20 million for tests they KNEW wouldn't work

It is my opinion that it was well reported, I can back that opinion with factual articles yes cherie.

Scientists have discovered that although the tests can show that a person has been infected with a coronavirus, they cannot adequately differentiate between the virus that is causing the current Covid-19 outbreak and other types of coronavirus –which just cause colds. They found that a range of devices all produced far too many false positives.

“It does seem surprising that these tests were bought with a contract that wasn’t contingent on their usability,” Clark told the*Observer. “In learning lessons through this crisis, it’s important for future contracts to recognise this risk.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...th-chiefs-told

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It is my opinion that it was well reported, I can back that opinion with factual articles yes cherie.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...th-chiefs-told

Senior health officials are facing demands to reveal how much has been spent on millions of inaccurate coronavirus antibody tests, after it emerged that payments had been guaranteed even if the kits failed to work.

that's completely different to saying they KNEW THEY WOULDNT WORK....presumably they were the non negotiable terms of the company offering the tests, and rather than gamble with them not working they gambled with them working rather than doing nothing kizzy

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Senior health officials are facing demands to reveal how much has been spent on millions of inaccurate coronavirus antibody tests, after it emerged that payments had been guaranteed even if the kits failed to work.

that's completely different to saying they KNEW THEY WOULDNT WORK....presumably they were the non negotiable terms of the company offering the tests, and rather than gamble with them not working they gambled with them working rather than doing nothing kizzy

Where did I say I or they ' KNEW THEY WOULDN'T WORK'?

They didn't and dont work that is a fact, they are not fit for purpose,they never were. There has never been any indication that any appropriate test exists.

Kathy Hall, director of Covid-19 testing strategy at the Department for Health and Social Care, revealed last week that the government was working to recoup money paid for the tests “where possible”. Asked iwhether payment was made on the assumption that the devices worked, she said: “Our overall strategy was to secure tests in order to get them validated. That meant ordering minimum volumes in order to secure them. And we wanted to make sure we had the opportunity to do that, so that was the strategy we took, yes.”

A better strategy would have been to wait for a sufficiency accurate test and buy those imo.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Where did I say I or they ' KNEW THEY WOULDN'T WORK'?

They didn't and dont work that is a fact, they are not fit for purpose,they never were. There has never been any indication that any appropriate test exists.

Kathy Hall, director of Covid-19 testing strategy at the Department for Health and Social Care, revealed last week that the government was working to recoup money paid for the tests “where possible”. Asked iwhether payment was made on the assumption that the devices worked, she said: “Our overall strategy was to secure tests in order to get them validated. That meant ordering minimum volumes in order to secure them. And we wanted to make sure we had the opportunity to do that, so that was the strategy we took, yes.”

A better strategy would have been to wait for a sufficiency accurate test and buy those imo.

you clearly said here they knew they didnt work and its not me just interpreting your post as TS's response shows he interpreted in the same way


There is a difference between knowing they wouldn't work full stop, and they might work...

riginally Posted by Cherie View Post
Its not like they spent 20 mil knowing they didn't work, they took a gamble which would have paid off if it did work...onwards and upwards

Yes they did know iYt was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

you clearly said here they knew they didnt work and its not me just interpreting your post as TS's response shows he interpreted in the same way


There is a difference between knowing they wouldn't work full stop, and they might work...

riginally Posted by Cherie View Post
Its not like they spent 20 mil knowing they didn't work, they took a gamble which would have paid off if it did work...onwards and upwards

Yes they did know iYt was well reported they did not work. It's odd how people can just rewrite news to fit a narrative :/

They knew they DIDN'T work, that is not the same as saying they WOULDN’T work.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Where did I say I or they ' KNEW THEY WOULDN'T WORK'?

They didn't and dont work that is a fact, they are not fit for purpose,they never were. There has never been any indication that any appropriate test exists.

Kathy Hall, director of Covid-19 testing strategy at the Department for Health and Social Care, revealed last week that the government was working to recoup money paid for the tests “where possible”. Asked iwhether payment was made on the assumption that the devices worked, she said: “Our overall strategy was to secure tests in order to get them validated. That meant ordering minimum volumes in order to secure them. And we wanted to make sure we had the opportunity to do that, so that was the strategy we took, yes.”

A better strategy would have been to wait for a sufficiency accurate test and buy those imo.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They knew they DIDN'T work, that is not the same as saying they WOULDN’T work.

I give up

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It's nothing like that ...for some perspective here's some info on central govt funding cuts and what they mean to local areas.

https://news.leeds.gov.uk/news/final...9-20-announced

An article pointing out that one town has had its budget slashed by over £250 million over 10 years is supposed to convince me that £20 million is a large sum when considered in the context of a national budget? It surely demonstrates the exact opposite.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

An article pointing out that one town has had its budget slashed by over £250 million over 10 years is supposed to convince me that £20 million is a large sum when considered in the context of a national budget? It surely demonstrates the exact opposite.

Nope you missed the point the cut in that year of 15 million in funding led to significant cuts to services and a large increase in council tax.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I give up

Good maybe you will stop trying to twist my words now.