So, coronavirus...

[Insane_Homer]

struck a nerve did I

[Insane_Homer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54974373

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."

[dpedin]

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.

[Saint]

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 ?

The safety data will show all that when published (which is required for even emergency approval) - but in short, yes. Looking at the Pfizer participants, there's a VERY wide range of ages, specifically people with pre-existing conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, asthma, high BMI etc. There's probably more than you would usually find due to the larger than normal size of the trial group.

The AstraZeneca trial is probably even more broad covering a large number of different countries as well

[Bimbowomxn]

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’ll be clear, only Saint can actually comment here and Bindi in the other bored otherwise you’re just another thick twat on the rugby bored.

No one has mentioned trump, 5g or microchips, that a rushed vaccine can have and cause concern is based on historical issues and natural concerns about the process.

The fact that masks are a placebo from governments is also not only valid but up until a few months ago the accepted science.

You do realise there’s been mistakes made with vaccines previously in the regard of them being rushed or poorly administered, that’s not a way out theory it’s a fact.

Now I’d say run along , but you can’t at the moment can you due to Viral fatigue.

[Bimbowomxn]

The safety data will show all that when published (which is required for even emergency approval) - but in short, yes. Looking at the Pfizer participants, there's a VERY wide range of ages, specifically people with pre-existing conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, asthma, high BMI etc. There's probably more than you would usually find due to the larger than normal size of the trial group.

Good news.

[Flockwitt]

Doesn't look like it'll come fast enough for the USA. They're going to be running at plus 1000 deaths a day next week with no end in sight

FFS, I've just realized Thanksgiving is next week also. The we don't give a shit crowd will be travelling all over the country

[Sandstorm]

Doesn't look like it'll come fast enough for the USA. They're going to be running at plus 1000 deaths a day next week with no end in sight

FFS, I've just realized Thanksgiving is next week also. The we don't give a shit crowd will be travelling all over the country

1k a day is nowhere near the real USA prediction. More like 4K. They’re boned.

[Bimbowomxn]

[Longshanks]

Lateral flow tests are only used to establish if someone is infectious.
For that they are incredibly accurate

[Ymx]

Who are conducting the secondary testing LFT tests?

[JPNZ]

Really feel for the UK posters who look like they will be having a lockdown Christmas this year. That Dec 2nd date will surely be extended on current numbers.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a visiting professor of public health of the University of Bristol and a member of the Independent Sage group of experts, said he had little hope that the latest lockdown will quash the spread of the virus, given the spring lockdown had little effect in reducing infection levels in some parts of England.

“We know that the [last] and even more severe lockdown did not get the virus under control, so how can we expect that this will bring the virus under control given that some things have not changed?” he argued.

“How can we be in a good place by Christmas? I think it is impossible,”

[Slick]

I thought LF tests were only being given to those with no symptoms.

Amazingly, less people are showing positive

[Longshanks]

I thought LF tests were only being given to those with no symptoms.

Amazingly, less people are showing positive

Correct
A PCR is used to confirm a positive case
It's a weapon against the virus. You find about 50% of cases but you can also find the contacts of those positive and hopefully reduce even more transmission. It should drive the r rate down

[Slick]

I thought LF tests were only being given to those with no symptoms.

Amazingly, less people are showing positive

Correct
A PCR is used to confirm a positive case
It's a weapon against the virus. You find about 50% of cases but you can also find the contacts of those positive and hopefully reduce even more transmission. It should drive the r rate down

I just don’t understand why people that undoubtedly know this choose to be so deceitful, what is their end game? Being a smart arse? Winning in their own head? Just don’t get it at all.

Can you help, Bimbo?

[Bimbowomxn]

I thought LF tests were only being given to those with no symptoms.

Amazingly, less people are showing positive

Correct
A PCR is used to confirm a positive case
It's a weapon against the virus. You find about 50% of cases but you can also find the contacts of those positive and hopefully reduce even more transmission. It should drive the r rate down

PCR tests in Liverpool were offered to everyone.

If they were only offered to confirm those with symptoms the % wouldn’t be so low ....

[Bimbowomxn]

Really feel for the UK posters who look like they will be having a lockdown Christmas this year. That Dec 2nd date will surely be extended on current numbers.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a visiting professor of public health of the University of Bristol and a member of the Independent Sage group of experts, said he had little hope that the latest lockdown will quash the spread of the virus, given the spring lockdown had little effect in reducing infection levels in some parts of England.

“We know that the [last] and even more severe lockdown did not get the virus under control, so how can we expect that this will bring the virus under control given that some things have not changed?” he argued.

“How can we be in a good place by Christmas? I think it is impossible,”

https://workerspartyelection.wordpress. ... -articles/


He seems really nice and neutral.

And yes it’s him, though scully and Scally.

[Longshanks]

I thought LF tests were only being given to those with no symptoms.

Amazingly, less people are showing positive

Correct
A PCR is used to confirm a positive case
It's a weapon against the virus. You find about 50% of cases but you can also find the contacts of those positive and hopefully reduce even more transmission. It should drive the r rate down

PCR tests in Liverpool were offered to everyone.

If they were only offered to confirm those with symptoms the % wouldn’t be so low ....

They used PCR, but mainly lateral flow for people without symptoms. A quick result to establish whether someone is infectious is the whole purpose. You get the result in minutes.
Because there are false positives PCR are used to confirm.
They are still carrying out regular PCR tests for those with symptoms in Liverpool of course.
This is a trial, hopefully it proves successful.

[Bimbowomxn]

They are still carrying out regular PCR tests for those with symptoms in Liverpool of course.
This is a trial, hopefully it proves successful.

Even with regular PCR tests it’s less than 3% positive that’s a lot of non covid “symptoms “

The test could very successfully show a problem with the PCR test that needs fixing, of course it won’t.

[Longshanks]

They are still carrying out regular PCR tests for those with symptoms in Liverpool of course.
This is a trial, hopefully it proves successful.

Even with regular PCR tests it’s less than 3% positive that’s a lot of non covid “symptoms “

The test could very successfully show a problem with the PCR test that needs fixing, of course it won’t.

97% of people with Covid symptoms probably have a cold or similar.

[Bimbowomxn]

https://www.thelocal.ch/20201116/a-covi ... ronagraben

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Really feel for the UK posters who look like they will be having a lockdown Christmas this year. That Dec 2nd date will surely be extended on current numbers.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a visiting professor of public health of the University of Bristol and a member of the Independent Sage group of experts, said he had little hope that the latest lockdown will quash the spread of the virus, given the spring lockdown had little effect in reducing infection levels in some parts of England.

“We know that the [last] and even more severe lockdown did not get the virus under control, so how can we expect that this will bring the virus under control given that some things have not changed?” he argued.

“How can we be in a good place by Christmas? I think it is impossible,”

Yep, the emphasis now seems to be on ending the national lockdown to enter into a series of regional lockdowns that will often be stricter still. All this so the national government can say they've ended the national lockdown in time for Christmas and it's on local government now, though to be fair they're also hard at work on coming up with a new name for regional lockdowns.

[Rinkals]

If there are 80% less infections than the test show, that means that the whole Corona virus thing is fake, yes?

I. Am. SO. Relieved.

[Enzedder]

Does that mean all of those dead people can come back now?

[Paddington Bear]

Really feel for the UK posters who look like they will be having a lockdown Christmas this year. That Dec 2nd date will surely be extended on current numbers.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a visiting professor of public health of the University of Bristol and a member of the Independent Sage group of experts, said he had little hope that the latest lockdown will quash the spread of the virus, given the spring lockdown had little effect in reducing infection levels in some parts of England.

“We know that the [last] and even more severe lockdown did not get the virus under control, so how can we expect that this will bring the virus under control given that some things have not changed?” he argued.

“How can we be in a good place by Christmas? I think it is impossible,”

For some of us, not having to see our extended families is a blessing...

Joyous big family Christmas gatherings have always struck me as very Hollywood.

[Insane_Homer]

#DailyCovidUpdate | 17th November 2020

Cases: +20,051- (-361 from last week) and before he rejoices. Last 7 days, +17,061 (+10.7%)
Deaths: +598, up from 532 last week - Last 7 days 2,975 +455 (18.1%)

[Bimbowomxn]

#DailyCovidUpdate | 17th November 2020

Cases: +20,051- and before he states cases have gone down and we should all rejoice. Last 7 days, +17,061 (+10.7%)
Deaths: +598, up from 532 last week - Last 7 days 2,975 +455 (18.1%)

“Before he points out I’ve completely changed my comparative metric and am now choosing to use the average, I will change this to the monthly average fairly soon as other wise it will show cases falling and deaths levelling out. “


Can we have a comparison of “cases” science the amount of tests taken, because “cases” are falling and have been for a while.

[Insane_Homer]

cases 'falling' up

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

cases falling for a while.JPG (29.73 KiB) Viewed 580 times

[Bimbowomxn]

Yes IH

[Insane_Homer]

Even JHB says " levelled off/flatlined", not falling. What's his source ONS data?

[Tichtheid]

Do we know what number of tests were carried out in that time period, inclusive of the dates mentioned?

I ask because 8% of x+y can be greater than 10% of x in actual numbers.

[Slick]

Really feel for the UK posters who look like they will be having a lockdown Christmas this year. That Dec 2nd date will surely be extended on current numbers.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a visiting professor of public health of the University of Bristol and a member of the Independent Sage group of experts, said he had little hope that the latest lockdown will quash the spread of the virus, given the spring lockdown had little effect in reducing infection levels in some parts of England.

“We know that the [last] and even more severe lockdown did not get the virus under control, so how can we expect that this will bring the virus under control given that some things have not changed?” he argued.

“How can we be in a good place by Christmas? I think it is impossible,”

For some of us, not having to see our extended families is a blessing...

Joyous big family Christmas gatherings have always struck me as very Hollywood.

I can understand that for you

[Slick]

Just noticed this.

Now I’d say run along , but you can’t at the moment can you due to Viral fatigue.

Classy stuff Bimbo.

[Bimbowomxn]

Just noticed this.

Now I’d say run along , but you can’t at the moment can you due to Viral fatigue.

Classy stuff Bimbo.

Oh, I’m every cunt under the sun, but this you object to.

[Bimbowomxn]

Even JHB says " levelled off/flatlined", not falling. What's his source ONS data?

Exponential rise ......

Nope.

And all before lockdown had an affect (if any).

[Insane_Homer]

because “cases” are falling and have been for a while.

Exponential rise ......

Nope.

Someone's morning nap can't come soon enough.

[dpedin]

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’ll be clear, only Saint can actually comment here and Bindi in the other bored otherwise you’re just another thick twat on the rugby bored.

No one has mentioned trump, 5g or microchips, that a rushed vaccine can have and cause concern is based on historical issues and natural concerns about the process.

The fact that masks are a placebo from governments is also not only valid but up until a few months ago the accepted science.

You do realise there’s been mistakes made with vaccines previously in the regard of them being rushed or poorly administered, that’s not a way out theory it’s a fact.

Now I’d say run along , but you can’t at the moment can you due to Viral fatigue.

Ha ha ha ha! Would have responded earlier but was at gym last night doing my regular circuit. Can't be bothered opening up the mask debate again - others will judge you. Amazing to think that with the eyes of the world on them and the rigorous testing and approval processes that a drug company would not test a vaccine on the very people who are dying from the virus. Children are a different matter.

I'm sure a few folk will bunch together and pay any transfer fee for your move to another bored - just let us know which one you think you would fit in with.

[Bimbowomxn]

because “cases” are falling and have been for a while.

Exponential rise ......

Nope.

Someone's morning nap can't come soon enough.

Look at you reaching for semantics. They’re falling by your old measure, they’re falling by % of tests measured and the R is below one , but hey here you are after warning us of 4,000 deaths a day with a semantic.

[Insane_Homer]

... but hey here you are after warning us of 4,000 deaths a day with a semantic.

You've mentioned that twice now. I've stated no such thing.

Says the master of deflection by semantics (remember 11,000 "Deaths" from a few days ago ).

[Slick]

Just noticed this.

Now I’d say run along , but you can’t at the moment can you due to Viral fatigue.

Classy stuff Bimbo.

Oh, I’m every cunt under the sun, but this you object to.

It's very different and you know it.