Danijel Gorupec

(I don't know wood.... It is not probably the best thread, but I didn't feel like opening a new one) A small solid wooden beam (about 0.1x0.1x1.5m) is fastened at one end to metal plates (by screws); the other end is free. The sideways force acts on the beam. Is there any preference how I should place the screws (perpendicular to force direction or parallel to it - see sketches A and B below)? It is an oak beam. The force is impulse-like (not steady) - like if someone step on the beam from time to time.

Not sure what an evidence would be... I found the following passage on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford–AstraZeneca_COVID-19_vaccine) : "On 22 January 2021, AstraZeneca announced that in the event the European Union approved the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, initial supplies would be lower than expected due to production issues at Novasep in Belgium. Only 31 million of the previously predicted 80 million doses would be delivered to the European Union by March 2021." On the same page there is following data (indicating that indeed the number of delivered vaccines by March was lower than 80 million - apparently, it was above 17 million, but how much exactly depends on how much vaccine was hold on stock by countries and how many people received the double dose) "On 14 March 2021, AstraZeneca has confirmed that after over 17 million people have been vaccinated in the European Union ..." The difference between the 'predicted' (80 mio) and the delivered (I don't know, I guess about 20mio by mid March), imo, might be the reason why rumors started that AstraZeneca is selling 'our' vaccines elsewhere. In my opinion, it could be that these rumors were additionally fueled by statements like following (from the same page): "On 17 December, a tweet by the Belgian Budget State Secretary revealed the European Union (EU) would pay €1.78 (US$2.16) per dose." "In August 2020, AstraZeneca agreed to provide 300 million doses to the USA for US$1.2 billion, implying a cost of US$4 per dose." ---- Admittingly, citing Wikipedia is not much of a proof. On the other hand, this is only a forum and even Wikipedia might be good enough for the sake of discussion. ----- I also need to 'quantify' the term 'outrageously'... I never understood 'outrageously' to be a quantifiable term. I understand it in qualitative way, like, for example, terms 'more' or 'bluer'... What I meant by 'outrageously' can be described as "so much that it cannot be easily explained any other way but by deception." ----- I don't know how much these vaccines are different, but I imagine that AstraZeneca experts should know. If mRNA vaccines are so different that it was not possible to make predictions, then they had to refrain from making promises (or 'predictions' as they said) in the first place. ----- One should also consider that, for some reason, people put different weighting factors in front of 'possibly cured' and in front of 'possibly harmed' (even medical professionals -> "do no harm"). So even if statistics is clear, people might prefer to choose 'irrationally'.

Knowing myself, I would probably do nothing. I am not an activist... But I would be interested to learn if a simple sales lie caused the distrust avalanche that will eventually kill people.

You are smart.... Did you ever work in sales? Fine, we don't have enough information. Should we demand it?

Somebody powerful enough that has some interest (revenge, perhaps)... Sorry, I have hard time finding the right words or terms in English and so my writing might not always be clear (I might use terms that are too narrow or too wide).

Do you think their wrong estimation was a honest mistake or do you think their estimation was basically correct but somebody inflated it when presenting to EU public?

But this is my whole point. The numbers presented to EU public were not just slightly higher than was actually realized. They were outrageously higher. How came such a large mistake? What is your explanation, then?

Hmm, because otherwise I have to believe that pharmaceutical companies were not capable to estimate their own production capabilities, not even close. And this is hard to believe for such experienced companies. (Yes, it can be that evil EU politicians fabricated and influenced all of it... companies were really careful when making promises, but EU politicians presented overinflated promises to the public... then companies made clear public statements that they never made such overinflated promises... but evil EU politicians managed to suppress such statements and even rewrote them to look like apologies for not being able to deliver...... The problem with this hypothesis is that nobody in EU believes our politicians are that smart.)

I fully agree. And I think EU failed big time... (and it will fail every time a quick decision must be maid). Still, I would be surprised if companies were honest when they made initial delivery estimations - this dishonesty now opens a space for EU politicians to clear themselves of their own guilt. Sadly.

I am struggling to find good media articles in English that mention official statements given by AstraZeneca that AstraZeneca will not be able to keep up with their delivery promises to EU... here is one that I just googled: https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/coronavirus/articles/241757-astrazeneca-vaccine-new-shipping-delays-in-the-eu/lang/en "...this reduction could reach 60% of doses secured in the first quarter of the year, for a total of 31 million doses instead of the 80 million doses expected in the EU..." Here is another article (but without numbers): https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/astrazeneca-says-initial-eu-delivery-volumes-of-covid-vaccine-to-fall-short.html Apparently, they experienced low yields and therefore delays. How should I understand this: a) Something really unexpected happen, something that almost never happens during vaccine production? b) This industry is such that they never have much control over how the production will go - this is a known limitation, yet they are jolly fellows happy to make very optimistic promises? c) They are delivering to others instead (say USA, Israel...) because the others are paying more? d) Something else? How do I know they intentionally overstated their delivery capabilities (to grab contracts)? If I would know, I would sue. I said "I am not buying it", which is a typical intro into a sentence that you are strongly suspecting... But even if not true, the important is what people in EU believe (and I think they believe that companies are selling elsewhere despite promises to EU, forcing EU into a dire situation). This belief is the reason, I speculate, why it was so easy to 'demonize' AstraZeneca vaccine with EU population (especially after frau Merkel refused to get the AstraZeneca vaccine shot).

I don't understand this part. The quantity and schedule of vaccine shots promised by politicians was clearly much more optimistic than actually realized - are you saying that politicians lied about what they agreed with companies (and somehow intimidated companies not to deny such lies)? Or are you saying that politicians somehow managed to extort such unrealistic promises from sales departments of those companies? Maybe, but imo the simpler explanation is that the promises politicians obtained from companies were already inflated. (European politicians might be too dumb and incapable to intimidate and extort.) (BTW, I am just curious - did you ever have to deal with sales department in your company? Maybe you were a sales person yourself? In companies where I worked, I always had to remind the sales personnel that what they are promising to customers is not very realistic. That is why I have this strong hunch that also sales people in pharmaceutical companies were clearly warned by their engineers that the production schedules announced publicly are not realistic.)

But when companies started making delivery deals, they somehow overestimated their capabilities by a large margin. Where was all those great experience and knowledge then? I am not buying it - they knowingly overstated their delivery capabilities only to get contracts. Now people feel betrayed and then any irrational behavior is not unexpected. I honestly believe that in continental Europe people feel betrayed by AstraZeneca (being it for righteous reason or not). Media sense this and cherry-pick the stories to publish. I think this is all that there is, but AstraZeneca is not without its sin.

Who knows (But If you love conspiracy theories, here is a pet of mine -> AstraZeneca promised vaccine shots to Germany, and Merkel promised this to German people... then AstraZeneca sold vaccines elsewhere... Merkel waited to slap them back and the opportunity came quickly .)

I don't think it is a payback for Brexit :)... I don't think Europeans even know from where AstraZeneca is... I guess it might more likely be because Merkel refused AstraZeneca vaccine.

Does the coincidence happen with pfizer too?

The increased friction in gas engines (compared to electric motors) pollutes mostly through engine oil burning and (inadequate) disposal, I would guess.

My understanding of the Noah's flood is that water raised everywhere (not only over land) so you would have pressure increase also on the ocean floor. When I read the Bible, I didn't notice that the water was stacked only over the land - did I miss this delightful detail? Right. It would really make me angry if anybody seriously suggested ancient memories from 5 million years ago - as some SFN members say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Black Sea flood seems as more realistic inspiration for the Noah's flood, imo. Although, I would say, more probably the inspiration came from many flooding events (tsunami included).

We don't have just male and female sports.... we have many more. For example, in boxing you have several weight categorizes (male and female). We make categorization in many different ways (by weight, by age, by sex, by disabilities.... or even by allowance of certain drugs). Once categorized, we can separate athletes into category-clean groups or we can include some handicap to certain categories to make them even. I agree with Curious Layman that future of sex-based categorization is not bright. I think, after some longer time, some other categorization method (depending on sport) will become more popular (in boxing, for example, we might choose to categorize only by bone+muscle mass). What I hope is that there will be the ultimate category. The category where anybody can try to compete.... (btw, is this already so.... are all 'man' sports open for females who might be able to compete?)

Some of the gas energy is wasted through the chimney of your home. So I don't think the kWh comparison would be fair (it could be more fair if you count how much energy was wasted during production of electric energy).

Unexpected weather? Or efficiency drop? Or you some unexpected maintenance?

Do you need gas any more or not?

Were there attempts to propose even more natural temperature scale than the Kelvin scale? (I am not sure what would that mean, perhaps something like this: temperature increase of one unit means average particle kinetic energy increase of one joule, or one nano-joule, or one eV...)

Ha ha... I didn't see this coming. I always supposed he was an American guy.

Another problem with the idea is that Earth continuously receives energy from Sun and must release that heat to space at the same rate (to keep its temperature steady). So, if your anti-global-warming method depends on the water evaporation, you would need to evaporate water continuously... Therefore, the answer to the question "how much ocean water would we need" would be "all of it, eventually, if you don't switch to another method in the meantime".

Are you asking if they can kaboom? I wonder. When I was a kid I read somewhere that super-heavy elements could have critical masses of several grams and thus be used for pocket-size 'gadgets'. I wonder if this is viable.