Longshanks wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:50 pm
Back in February many scientists were saying we were unlikely to see a successful covid vaccine
Today 4 are claiming they work and are safe, and that's without lots of others in development.
Maybe we'll also get a cure for the common cold out of this too.
Nah. That'd need vaccines for around 200 different viruses - that's why we don't have one, the common cold isn't one disease, it's a couple of hundred. And there's no financial return on developing a vaccine for a couple of percent of cases of the common cold.
Couple of cases? Common cold kills millions every week! It’s just like Covid19.
more than a million dying a week sounds reasonable, I don't know how reasonable millions in the plural might be as an every week occurrence. and whilst you could list heart failure as a cause of death for everyone that isn't going to hold for the cold
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2020 9:45 pm
by Sandstorm
Whoosh Pudding
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2020 9:49 pm
by Saint
Two vaccines showing to be effective is ridiculously good news. The long term implications for vaccine development are huge - the reason this has been developed so quickly is that, rather than the trial and error "traditional" approach, this has been targeted. Whether the mRNA approach of the two results do far, or the grafting of the AZ approach (assuming it's successful), this has radically changed our approach and understanding of vaccine development in future.
(I am discounting Russia and China till I see any release of real data for evaluation)
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
by Niegs
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:16 pm
by Bimbowomxn
Niegs wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
Niegs wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
Niegs wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
It’s about their attitude to the virus, toolbag.
He really is the epitome of Chimps typing isn't he?
Niegs wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
Longshanks wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:50 pm
Back in February many scientists were saying we were unlikely to see a successful covid vaccine
Today 4 are claiming they work and are safe, and that's without lots of others in development.
Maybe we'll also get a cure for the common cold out of this too.
Nah. That'd need vaccines for around 200 different viruses - that's why we don't have one, the common cold isn't one disease, it's a couple of hundred. And there's no financial return on developing a vaccine for a couple of percent of cases of the common cold.
Couple of cases? Common cold kills millions every week! It’s just like Covid19.
Couple of percent of cases. That’s rather an important difference.
Longshanks wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:50 pm
Back in February many scientists were saying we were unlikely to see a successful covid vaccine
Today 4 are claiming they work and are safe, and that's without lots of others in development.
Maybe we'll also get a cure for the common cold out of this too.
Nah. That'd need vaccines for around 200 different viruses - that's why we don't have one, the common cold isn't one disease, it's a couple of hundred. And there's no financial return on developing a vaccine for a couple of percent of cases of the common cold.
Some of the therapeutics being developed i was referring to for the common cold
I realise I didn't make that clear
Ah right, ok.
I only found out recently there’s a pneumococcal vaccine, I might sort myself out with one of those as I can be a bit prone to chest infections.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
It’s about their attitude to the virus, toolbag.
He really is the epitome of Chimps typing isn't he?
Nah. Chimps typing has been hypothesized to eventually produce a work of Shakespeare. Nobody remotely expects something constructive from Bimbo's posts.
Niegs wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 10:12 pm
Feels equal parts infuriating and heartbreaking that people are so gaslit/defiant/ignorant, literally, until death believing it isn't real.
Why link the Two events which clearly have nothing to do with current epidemic levels though?
It’s about their attitude to the virus, toolbag.
But blaming a Trump event and a Bikers event, I’m not so they’d have used a BLM protest....
It’s the first vaccine of its type .... completely new technology.
Nah it's not
I’ll ask you the same question what other RNA modification vaccine are humans currently or have ever taken ?
Why is it important if it's for humans or not? It's not like the process changes, or the storage time changes.
Hell, even if it is the only one of it's kind (which it isn't), they've had 6 months to leave it in a freezer and see how degraded it's become regardless.
It’s the first vaccine of its type .... completely new technology.
Nah it's not
I’ll ask you the same question what other RNA modification vaccine are humans currently or have ever taken ?
isn't this rather shifting the goalposts as this started with some speculating on how long a vaccine could be stored and retain usage? to which I noted it wasn't brand new tech, which it isn't in the sense there's decades of research into just this area now, and a great deal of effort has gone into being able to store vaccines at higher temps. The idea eventually would be to have vaccines, well anything in the mRNA field, being able to be stored outside the cold chain, but that's a ways off.
I’ll ask you the same question what other RNA modification vaccine are humans currently or have ever taken ?
isn't this rather shifting the goalposts as this started with some speculating on how long a vaccine could be stored and retain usage? to which I noted it wasn't brand new tech, which it isn't in the sense there's decades of research into just this area now, and a great deal of effort has gone into being able to store vaccines at higher temps. The idea eventually would be to have vaccines, well anything in the mRNA field, being able to be stored outside the cold chain, but that's a ways off.
A bit, however the tech has never been successfully applied and by accounts we are hearing very new tech has been used.
There a clear point this is the first vaccine if it’s type to be taken by humans not subject to testing.
I’ll ask you the same question what other RNA modification vaccine are humans currently or have ever taken ?
isn't this rather shifting the goalposts as this started with some speculating on how long a vaccine could be stored and retain usage? to which I noted it wasn't brand new tech, which it isn't in the sense there's decades of research into just this area now, and a great deal of effort has gone into being able to store vaccines at higher temps. The idea eventually would be to have vaccines, well anything in the mRNA field, being able to be stored outside the cold chain, but that's a ways off.
A bit, however the tech has never been successfully applied and by accounts we are hearing very new tech has been used.
There a clear point this is the first vaccine if it’s type to be taken by humans not subject to testing.
Not subject to testing? What do you think they've been doing for the last 7 months? This thing has been in trials since April. And the technology behind it is far far older. How then is it confusing to you that they know what temps it can be stored at safely for 6 months?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:30 am
by Saint
I think some people are getting confused a bit about what an mRNA virus is/does.
It doesn't re-write your DNA
It doesn't introduce anything to your system that sticks around forever.
It doesn't use dangerous chemicals.
It's not active
It's simply a slightly different way of teaching the immune system how to fight a virus, with many potential benefits. The theory for this has been around since the 90s, but the kind technology required to manufacture this, particularly at scale, is only a couple of years old.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:31 am
by Biffer
Saint wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:30 am
I think some people are getting confused a bit about what an mRNA virus is/does.
It doesn't re-write your DNA
It doesn't introduce anything to your system that sticks around forever.
It doesn't use dangerous chemicals.
It's not active
It's simply a slightly different way of teaching the immune system how to fight a virus, with many potential benefits. The theory for this has been around since the 90s, but the kind technology required to manufacture this, particularly at scale, is only a couple of years old.
Shit take on manufacturing techniques incoming in 3, 2, 1...
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:44 am
by Bimbowomxn
Not subject to testing? What do you think they've been doing for the last 7 months? This thing has been in trials since April. And the technology behind it is far far older. How then is it confusing to you that they know what temps it can be stored at safely for 6 months?
No one whom hasn’t been subject to testing has had the vaccine.
Oh, and they’ve not tested it for 7 months.
Oh and this process is normally years long and many more variants of test recipients.
Not subject to testing? What do you think they've been doing for the last 7 months? This thing has been in trials since April. And the technology behind it is far far older. How then is it confusing to you that they know what temps it can be stored at safely for 6 months?
No one whom hasn’t been subject to testing has had the vaccine.
Oh, and they’ve not tested it for 7 months.
Oh and this process is normally years long and many more variants of test recipients.
You were asking how they can know that it can be safely stored for 6 months. Phase 1 trials started in April. We're in November 11-4 = 7. I suspect before they started phase 1 trials, they probably had some slight idea of how the fuck it was supposed to be stored so it doesn't degrade! And I guess they've probably had some stored for most of the duration of the trials. This has been tested for 7 months, and the stored for longer, since they'd have had to make the stuff before they could have started phase 1 trials anyway...
I need a better ignore function, one that doesn't show replies. My willpower has given up today and I keep opening the idiots comments.
Not subject to testing? What do you think they've been doing for the last 7 months? This thing has been in trials since April. And the technology behind it is far far older. How then is it confusing to you that they know what temps it can be stored at safely for 6 months?
No one whom hasn’t been subject to testing has had the vaccine.
Oh, and they’ve not tested it for 7 months.
Oh and this process is normally years long and many more variants of test recipients.
They don't need to test this specific delivery aimed at producing a good amount of antibodies for Covid 19 to know what temp it can be stored at. It's like using a pizza box to deliver a pizza, it doesn't really matter what toppings you put on it the pizza box is a known technology
But blaming a Trump event and a Bikers event, I’m not so they’d have used a BLM protest....
If that was really your takeaway from that ... I completely missed any mention of mass-gathering events in that, but maybe it's because I was actually moved by a nurse seeing people die who don't believe they have what they have, largely because there are people turning a deadly virus into a political issue.
But blaming a Trump event and a Bikers event, I’m not so they’d have used a BLM protest....
If that was really your takeaway from that ... I completely missed any mention of mass-gathering events in that, but maybe it's because I was actually moved by a nurse seeing people die who don't believe they have what they have, largely because there are people turning a deadly virus into a political issue.
The piece was introduced by footage and comments from both events. Nurses being sad is sad I agree. But she was being used for a political purpose by CNN not an informative one.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:07 pm
by JM2K6
If only there had been studies that looked at these various events and noted the outcomes in terms of COVID, as well as things like, ooh, I dunno, mask wearing
But blaming a Trump event and a Bikers event, I’m not so they’d have used a BLM protest....
If that was really your takeaway from that ... I completely missed any mention of mass-gathering events in that, but maybe it's because I was actually moved by a nurse seeing people die who don't believe they have what they have, largely because there are people turning a deadly virus into a political issue.
Also why would anyone argue that large public gatherings to cheer and shout together and not wearing masks isn't contributing to current epidemic levels?
The biggest difference between this vaccine development schedule and a typical vaccine has been the very initial stages - precisely because new tech, whether the mRNA approach or the OXxford type - have enabled us to accurately produce a highly targeted functioning vaccine without the years of trial and error that has gone into the more traditional vaccine development programmes. After that, consolidating the Phase I/II and II/III has helped a lot, as has SCALE - a typical phase III programme would maybe have only 3,000 candidates, and therefore would take much longer for sufficient evidence of effectiveness to appear (it helps also that there's a LOT of Coronavirus around, so there's a high baseline to compare against)
Phase IV will continue post approval, but that's typical for most vaccines, as that involves long term study of immunity.
So, we short circuited the initial development cycle by years, but that merely got us to candidates. We've collapsed the testing programme by a year or 2 by running different phases at the same time, but the cumulative amount of time spent in testing is pretty much in line with other vaccines.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:28 pm
by Insane_Homer
Anyone else find it odd that all the rigorous questioning of evidence and science of a vaccine doesn't apply when it comes to evaluating the consequences of Brexit
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:26 pm
by Sandstorm
Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:28 pm
Anyone else find it odd that all the rigorous questioning of evidence and science of a vaccine doesn't apply when it comes to evaluating the consequences of Brexit
Will of the Sheeple
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:39 pm
by Biffer
Saint wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:12 pm
The biggest difference between this vaccine development schedule and a typical vaccine has been the very initial stages - precisely because new tech, whether the mRNA approach or the OXxford type - have enabled us to accurately produce a highly targeted functioning vaccine without the years of trial and error that has gone into the more traditional vaccine development programmes. After that, consolidating the Phase I/II and II/III has helped a lot, as has SCALE - a typical phase III programme would maybe have only 3,000 candidates, and therefore would take much longer for sufficient evidence of effectiveness to appear (it helps also that there's a LOT of Coronavirus around, so there's a high baseline to compare against)
Phase IV will continue post approval, but that's typical for most vaccines, as that involves long term study of immunity.
So, we short circuited the initial development cycle by years, but that merely got us to candidates. We've collapsed the testing programme by a year or 2 by running different phases at the same time, but the cumulative amount of time spent in testing is pretty much in line with other vaccines.
Exactly. In the 8-12 years people normally throw about as typical vaccine development times, 2-4 years of that is identifying something that might work.
The other big factor in reducing timelines is usually ensuring that enough people who are in the trial have been exposed to the virus. That's not a problem with Covid because it's fucking everywhere. That's dramatically reduced the timeline as well. Add that in to the phase consolidation, and then put consider the priority and funding that's been put in and getting a vaccine in short timescales is not surprising.
The way some folk talk you'd think science hasn't advanced in this area since the polio vaccine.
Not subject to testing? What do you think they've been doing for the last 7 months? This thing has been in trials since April. And the technology behind it is far far older. How then is it confusing to you that they know what temps it can be stored at safely for 6 months?
No one whom hasn’t been subject to testing has had the vaccine.
Oh, and they’ve not tested it for 7 months.
Oh and this process is normally years long and many more variants of test recipients.
You were asking how they can know that it can be safely stored for 6 months. Phase 1 trials started in April. We're in November 11-4 = 7. I suspect before they started phase 1 trials, they probably had some slight idea of how the fuck it was supposed to be stored so it doesn't degrade! And I guess they've probably had some stored for most of the duration of the trials. This has been tested for 7 months, and the stored for longer, since they'd have had to make the stuff before they could have started phase 1 trials anyway...
I need a better ignore function, one that doesn't show replies. My willpower has given up today and I keep opening the idiots comments.
On the 23rd of November we will be at 7 months from the first human participation in taking the vaccine.
Very glad you’re satisfied.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:06 pm
by Bimbowomxn
Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:28 pm
Anyone else find it odd that all the rigorous questioning of evidence and science of a vaccine doesn't apply when it comes to evaluating the consequences of Brexit
Yes because they’re such similar subjects, you fucking loon.
All those scientific studies of “Brexit”...
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:07 pm
by Bimbowomxn
Saint wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:12 pm
The biggest difference between this vaccine development schedule and a typical vaccine has been the very initial stages - precisely because new tech, whether the mRNA approach or the OXxford type - have enabled us to accurately produce a highly targeted functioning vaccine without the years of trial and error that has gone into the more traditional vaccine development programmes. After that, consolidating the Phase I/II and II/III has helped a lot, as has SCALE - a typical phase III programme would maybe have only 3,000 candidates, and therefore would take much longer for sufficient evidence of effectiveness to appear (it helps also that there's a LOT of Coronavirus around, so there's a high baseline to compare against)
Phase IV will continue post approval, but that's typical for most vaccines, as that involves long term study of immunity.
So, we short circuited the initial development cycle by years, but that merely got us to candidates. We've collapsed the testing programme by a year or 2 by running different phases at the same time, but the cumulative amount of time spent in testing is pretty much in line with other vaccines.
Is there confidence that a wide enough variance of testing participants has been found? Old, young, fat, active, cross reactions with other drugs etc ?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:21 pm
by Line6 HXFX
The same fucking idiots who voted for Brexit are the very same fucking idiots who think that the virus isn't real and that the vaccine is going to get them addicted to communism or 5G orwhatever.
They don't do critical thinking. Their critical faculties are caputski.
They do self interest and conspiracy theory.
This country is far more fucked up than the USA.
Least they just elected a moderate.
At least they are not completely committed to the Trump fucked up agenda for the next 50 years.. like we are to Brexit.
Go-between paid £21m in taxpayer funds for NHS PPE
A Spanish businessman who acted as a go-between to secure protective garments for NHS staff in the coronavirus pandemic was paid $28m (£21m) in UK taxpayer cash.
The consultant had been in line for a further $20m of UK public funds, documents filed in a US court reveal.
The legal papers also reveal the American supplier of the PPE called the deals "lucrative".
The Department for Health was asked for comment but did not respond in time.
A legal dispute playing out in the courts in Miami has helped shine a light on the amount of money some companies have made supplying the NHS with equipment to protect staff from Covid infection.
Earlier this year, as the coronavirus pandemic was spreading rapidly around the world, Florida-based jewellery designer Michael Saiger set up a business to supply PPE to governments.
He used his experience of working with factories in China to land what are described as "a number of lucrative contracts" supplying protective gloves and gowns to the NHS.
Mr Saiger signed up a Spanish businessman, Gabriel Gonzalez Andersson, to help with "procurement, logistics, due diligence, product sourcing and quality control" of the PPE equipment. In effect, Mr Andersson was expected to find a manufacturer for deals that had already been done.
...
'Huge profits'
Alongside the legal dispute in Florida, the deals are set to be challenged in UK courts, by campaign group the Good Law Project. It accuses government ministers of not paying "sufficient regard" to tax-payers' money over a contract with the firm.
"We do not understand why, as late as June, government was still making direct awards of contracts sufficiently lucrative as to enable these sorts of profits to be made," Jolyon Maugham, the project's director told the BBC.
"The real criticism that is to be made here is of the huge profits that government allows to be generated."
Saint wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:12 pm
The biggest difference between this vaccine development schedule and a typical vaccine has been the very initial stages - precisely because new tech, whether the mRNA approach or the OXxford type - have enabled us to accurately produce a highly targeted functioning vaccine without the years of trial and error that has gone into the more traditional vaccine development programmes. After that, consolidating the Phase I/II and II/III has helped a lot, as has SCALE - a typical phase III programme would maybe have only 3,000 candidates, and therefore would take much longer for sufficient evidence of effectiveness to appear (it helps also that there's a LOT of Coronavirus around, so there's a high baseline to compare against)
Phase IV will continue post approval, but that's typical for most vaccines, as that involves long term study of immunity.
So, we short circuited the initial development cycle by years, but that merely got us to candidates. We've collapsed the testing programme by a year or 2 by running different phases at the same time, but the cumulative amount of time spent in testing is pretty much in line with other vaccines.
Is there confidence that a wide enough variance of testing participants has been found? Old, young, fat, active, cross reactions with other drugs etc ?
More confidence in the researchers doing the testing than a thick twat on a rugby chat bored trying to suggest experienced medical researchers can't carry out robust medical trials or that those doing the peer reviews etc don't have a clue what they are doing! I think you are on the wrong site here mate .... where is it that Trump supporters chat about election fraud, 5G masts and microchips in the vaccines? I suggest you seek a mid season transfer to there.
I completely missed any mention of mass-gathering events in that, but maybe it's because I was actually moved by a nurse seeing people die who don't believe they have what they have, largely because there are people turning a deadly virus into a political issue.
