-
I agree. It's a way for them to hit targets easily though. Like with the initial testing when they counted tests sent out not actually returned and tested. Smoke and mirrors always.
villa-ru-
It's a way for them to hit targets easily though. Like with the initial testing when they counted tests sent out not actually returned and tested. Smoke and mirrors always.
It also undermined the overall strategy. When it was shown they fudged it I imagine it had other consequences such as undermining trust, messaging etc.
"For Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, which represents foundation trusts in England, Hancock’s single-minded focus on reaching an arbitrary number cost the country another precious month. “Too much of April was wasted by focusing on the 100,000 tests by 30 April target at the expense of other aspects of a clear strategy,” he said. “The testing strategy, if there was one, got hijacked on the basis of just meeting that target when there were lots of other things that needed to be done.”
Prole.
I'm not convinced that should count when there are tens of millions of people who would gladly turn up with no notice for a jab if offered.
It's like the Pfizer vaccine only lasting 8-10 days in the box it is shipped in and if you want to store it longer you need an ultracold freezer. Why are we storing it?