From 23 May the UK is designated as a virus variant area of concern, so there are lots of restrictions on who can travel to Germany and the reasons which are permissible.
1/12
tldr: The @foreignoffice@fcotravel guidance is contradictory, but can be read as saying that you don't need to quarantine if you can show you're immune or were tested. I think this is WRONG. There appear to be few if any exemptions from 14-day quarantine.
2/12
Is it just me, or is this (image) contradictory? It looks like you can be "released from quarantine immediately if…" you can demonstrate proof of immunity (fully vaccinated or recent recovery), or…
3/12
…or a negative test, but only if you provide this "following to the pre-departure digital registration". (Is that written in English? It is from the Foreign Office web site @foreignoffice@fcotravel.)
4/12
But, it goes on, "…travellers arriving from the UK are subject to 14-day quarantine, and test and release is not available."
Does that mean - unless the test is done "following to the pre-departure digital registration" (whatever that means; or…
6/12
Or does it mean that all travellers arriving in Germany from the UK must quarantine, regardless, despite the text earlier in this section?
It is as clear as mud.
6/12
It reads like it's there so they @foreignoffice@fcotravel can say they're being helpful; but in such a way that they can claim you were too thick to understand what they were saying if you thought you wouldn't have to quarantine but the German authorities say otherwise.
7/12
The German federal web site is referred to by the FCO.
8/12
NB - "Proof of vaccination or of recovery from Covid-19 can replace a negative test certificate and exempt you from quarantine on entry. This does not apply if you have spent time in an area of virus variants of concern prior to entry."
11/12
There is further confirmation of this at bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/en/coronavirus… "If you spent time in an area of variants of concern, quarantine lasts for a period of 14 days and cannot be ended prematurely."
12/12
The BBC has been a mouthpiece of the tory right wing every since politicians attacked it for accurately reporting Kelly's death.
They did not let opponents of the Health and Social Care Bill/Act (HSCA) speak.
1/6
Nearly all professional bodies - medical royal colleges etc - knew it would be a disaster. Yet the BBC fielded people for "balance" who actually supported the HSCA but provided token words against it.
2/6
Nobody who wasn't reading the trade press would have had any idea that the medical, nursing, social care and other professions were saying the HSCA would be the disaster it is now almost universally recognised to have been.
3/6
1/8 Pregnant women are at greater risk if they catch Covid-19.
1.Adhikari EH, Spong CY. COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnant and Lactating Women. JAMA 2021;325(11):1039-1040. (doi.org/10.1001/jama.2…).
2/8 In Germany, the risk is considered so great in pregnancy that the household members of pregnant women are offered vaccination to reduce the risk of their spreading it to the pregnant woman.
3/8 Pregnant women respond well to Covid-19 vaccines.
2. Gray KJ, Bordt EA, Atyeo C, Deriso E, Akinwunmi B, Young N, et al. COVID-19 vaccine response in pregnant and lactating women: a cohort study. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2021. (ajog.org/article/S0002-…).
Somebody else was responsible for fitting unsafe cladding to their buildings. Leaseholders had every right to expect regulations to ensure their buildings were safe.
Maybe property developers fitted unsafe cladding knowingly, to save money; or perhaps were misled.
2/5
Either way, the responsibility for regulating buildings' safety lies with government.
It may or may not be reasonable to force developers or building owners to pay, but there's no point bankrupting them, and the ultimate responsibility lies with government.
3/5
I'm struggling to understand the first sentence of the abstract: "Delayed second-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination trades maximal effectiveness for a lower level of immunity across more of the population."
1/6
Longer prime-boost intervals generally elicit better immunity. So "delaying the second dose…" is likely to ensure a higher level of immunity across the population (once the booster dose has been given).
2/6
Also "…patients receiving these drugs should be prioritized for optimally timed second doses."
What is the "optimal" timing for a second dose?
3/6
Can anybody tell me how the "COVID-19 Antivirals Taskforce" announced this week gov.uk/government/new… relates to the "The COVID-19 Therapeutics Taskforce" which has I think existed since early 2020? gov.uk/government/gro…
1/8
Is this just yet another example of the government announcing something it's already done as something new, to make us think they are doing more than they actually are?
2/8
(They usually do this with money, announcing "new" spending which, when you look at the small print, isn't new at all.)
3/8