That only relates to the rental fees. I've not dome the maths, but the other costs to various places around the City associated with the fair are quite liable to more than outweigh that.
Perhaps they lied in the Cabinet Report the figures came from then. I'm sure the Auditors that check it before it's accepted will find out.
'Partially' The science boffins say it works. As long as the Govt accept that and use the same criteria to open things up, I'm happy.
I’m sure the “Science Boffins” believe the vaccine is effective when delivered in two parts around 21 days apart.
They've certainly said it's more effective after the 2nd dose, and that's what the approval is based on, but they haven't said it's ineffective as a single dose, in fact they've said it has a significant effect. The 'science boffins' have said that rattling off as many people as possible will bring down the rate of spread and reduce the loads on the hospitals, but it doesn't preclude the second dose being administered anyway.
Back to the "Science Boffins" (c) Not 606... I thought tonight Sur Padrick Valence Sheet dodged a question when asked a specific question about the effectiveness at differening second doses, I suppose if you hang with politicians...
Massive news coming out of Israel: 60% reduction in infections among 60+ years old 13-23 days after first dose.
Wonder what the Science Boffin contacts DMD talks to have to say about this. I think the Docs are being conservative in an attempt to shorten the gap. The reality is the results published & presented to the MHRA when applying for a Licence to put out the vaccine specifically stated a 3 week gap was recommended based in the data available. Anything more than 3 weeks is stepping into the unknown.
I clicked the like button, as it is interesting, as is your response, which is pretty much what I posted earlier. HTH. It should be about discussion, as there are differing views and interpretations of data.