Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 7:57 am
Sorry, my mistake, it’s 12. So add another week on.Ovals wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:38 am17 million ??
Page 207 of 375
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:05 pm
53,000 vaccinations yesterday in Scotland.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:41 pm
Which takes us over 500k UK wide today.
Great numbers but the weather is artic this week which may impact results.
Great numbers but the weather is artic this week which may impact results.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 4:41 pm
Total for yesterday ends up at 551K. Slightly down on the previous week.
Given that more capacity and centres are coming online every week, we appear to have reached the limitations of supply
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 4:46 pm
Im hearing ancedotally that vaccine centres in areas that have done largely done the first three groups will be stood down this week with supplies going elsewhere.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 4:49 pm
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:10 pm
Well the virus has touched us but advise from test and trace seems a bit rubbish so thought I'd ask the experts;
Daughter works in a care home and has daily tests, she's only 19 and our support bubble because she's not coping with lockdown due to her adhd.
My wife went and saw her last Tuesday as she was feeling low, on Wednesday one of the inmates started showing symptoms and yesterday my daughter had symptoms.
She tested positive today and app told her they "need your help to get in touch with people you have been in contact with whilst you were potentially infective"
She's asked me when she was potentially infective from?
Daughter works in a care home and has daily tests, she's only 19 and our support bubble because she's not coping with lockdown due to her adhd.
My wife went and saw her last Tuesday as she was feeling low, on Wednesday one of the inmates started showing symptoms and yesterday my daughter had symptoms.
She tested positive today and app told her they "need your help to get in touch with people you have been in contact with whilst you were potentially infective"
She's asked me when she was potentially infective from?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:15 pm
Wednesday. Maybe even Tuesday. Your wife should also get tested.Bullet wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:10 pm Well the virus has touched us but advise from test and trace seems a bit rubbish so thought I'd ask the experts;
Daughter works in a care home and has daily tests, she's only 19 and our support bubble because she's not coping with lockdown due to her adhd.
My wife went and saw her last Tuesday as she was feeling low, on Wednesday one of the inmates started showing symptoms and yesterday my daughter had symptoms.
She tested positive today and app told her they "need your help to get in touch with people you have been in contact with whilst you were potentially infective"
She's asked me when she was potentially infective from?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:28 pm
Thanks, I said Wednesday too and wife had negative test Friday morning before work. She's due another tomorrow morning so I don't have to isolate unless this is positive.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:15 pmWednesday. Maybe even Tuesday. Your wife should also get tested.Bullet wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:10 pm Well the virus has touched us but advise from test and trace seems a bit rubbish so thought I'd ask the experts;
Daughter works in a care home and has daily tests, she's only 19 and our support bubble because she's not coping with lockdown due to her adhd.
My wife went and saw her last Tuesday as she was feeling low, on Wednesday one of the inmates started showing symptoms and yesterday my daughter had symptoms.
She tested positive today and app told her they "need your help to get in touch with people you have been in contact with whilst you were potentially infective"
She's asked me when she was potentially infective from?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:29 pm
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:56 pm
Yep, all as per above. Your missus does need that second negative test to be 100% certain, so if possible you want to avoid contact with anyone outside the household until then, but the reality is that it's incredibly unlikely she or you is infected
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:17 pm
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:35 pm
Thanks, couldn't see anything definative about length of incubation period before having a positive test, only WHO recommendation that quarantine should be in place for 14 days from the last exposure to a confirmed case. This matches the 10 days from today.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:52 pm
Watching live LPGA Golf from Phoenix and there’s crowds of thousands following the players around the course. Shouting “Get in the hole!” in each other’s faces. 
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:02 pm
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:31 pm
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:40 pm
It's Florida ... they're idiots.
Just think of it as thinning the herd.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:04 am
Vaccine task force was led by an expert. The Test and trace stuff was led by an idiot.SaintK wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 10:00 am Excellent article by Katy Balls in The Spectator on how and why the vaccine taskforce has been so successful
It does beg the question as to why PPE and Test Track and Trace was so badly handled and has wasted £billionshttps://www.spectator.co.uk/article/se ... cess/ampUntil a few weeks ago, the government’s track record on Covid was one of repeated failure. The death toll, the depth of the recession, the public disapproval of the government: Britain’s figures were among the worst in the world. But with vaccines, things have changed. The UK is now on track to be the first major country in the world to vaccinate its way out of lockdown.
On PR I posted a good link to a Sunday Times article also showing how CIvil Servants sadly squeezing out the Vaccine task force by re-asserting control. I've viewing some sort of 'Yes Minister' scene here with Humphries going "Efficiency?!?? Effeciency?! We can't have that in the civil service. It's just not the ways things should be done!". Followed by a committee meeting that goes like this:
That article
Spoiler
Show
I wonder if the UK Vaccine task force will create a template for future:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how- ... -zq87cg2s0
How UK’s Covid vaccine success was based on small group of dedicated outsiders
Britain’s response to the pandemic has been marked by a record death toll and failures on many fronts but its inoculation programme has broken the mould, Sean O’Neill writes
Sean O’Neill, Chief Reporter
Friday February 05 2021, 5.00pm, The Times
Netty England was settling down in front of the television to watch Liverpool take on Norwich one Saturday evening last February when her phone pinged with an email.
The message which diverted her attention from the football came from the Covid-19 vaccine development team at Oxford University.
Oxford was excited about a potential vaccine but could only make 10 litres of the serum. Could England, a manufacturing expert at the UK Bioindustry Association (BIA), help the university scale up production to carry out clinical trials?
It was February 15, 2020. There were just nine recorded cases of Covid-19 in the UK and no deaths from the virus. Nevertheless England, 56, recognised the urgency of the situation.
Quickly she fired off an email to contacts at businesses — including Oxford Biomedica, Cobra Biologics and Fujifilm — which she knew had vaccine-manufacturing capability and expertise.
“By Monday evening we had a consortium which was made up of companies that, in normal times, would be competitors,” she said. “We had them all working together.”
That hastily convened group was the seed which grew into the now internationally acclaimed UK Vaccine Task Force, perhaps the only British success story in a pandemic response marked by a record death toll, delayed lockdowns, PPE shortages and a failing test and trace system.
The task force pulled in industry and scientific experts to expedite the search for the vaccines that would cut the death toll and lead society back to some kind of normality.
It gambled on a portfolio of vaccine candidates, signed contracts at speed and made the UK the first country in the world to begin an inoculation campaign.
A technician works at Oxford University on the Astrazeneca candidate vaccine in November last year
A technician works at Oxford University on the Astrazeneca candidate vaccine in November last year
JOHN CAIRNS/GETTY IMAGES
SPONSORED
The task force has also pumped hundreds of millions of pounds of public money into domestic vaccine-manufacturing capacity and committed £500 million to vaccination efforts in low income countries.
Now, however, the task force’s wings are being clipped as the Whitehall machine appears to be reasserting its grip over the vaccine effort.
One insider said: “The task force had complete freedom because no one in government knew anything about vaccines — there was a lack of knowledge about the very basics of development and manufacture.
“Now everyone thinks they’re a vaccine expert and the civil service is clawing back control. Decision-making has slowed right down. Someone says we need a decision today and they’re told that decision can only be made by a committee which doesn’t meet until next week. It’s like wading through treacle.”
Key appointments
Things were very different in April last year when, largely at the instigation of Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific officer, the task force was formed with that original BIA group at its core.
Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific officer, was one of the key instigators of the vaccine task force
Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific officer, was one of the key instigators of the vaccine task force
JASON ALDEN/EPA
The unit’s success can be attributed in large part to the fact it was run by a small, tight-knit group of people who knew each other, knew what they wanted and knew how to go about getting it.
Because of lockdown they met remotely — with a rule that the first person who made the classic mistake of trying to speak while muted had to chip into a beer kitty — but they moved with a speed and agility that was unheard of and frowned upon across much of government.
A key appointment from the BIA was Ian McCubbin, 64, former head of manufacturing and supply chain for the pharmaceutical giant GSK. He was joined by Clive Dix, 66, who brought 30 years of experience in life sciences research and industry.
The task force chairwoman was Kate Bingham, 55, a biochemist turned venture capitalist who has spent decades delivering the investment that turns research into new life-saving drugs.
Boris Johnson, who was at Oxford at the same time as Bingham, told her over the phone that her mission would be “to stop people dying”. She was uncertain about accepting the appointment because her expertise was in therapeutics, not vaccines. She asked for 24 hours to think it over and her daughter used the time to convince Bingham she had a duty to accept.
Boris Johnson, flanked by Professor Chris Whitty, left, the chief medical officer for England, and Sir Patrick Vallance during the early days of the pandemic
Boris Johnson, flanked by Professor Chris Whitty, left, the chief medical officer for England, and Sir Patrick Vallance during the early days of the pandemic
FACUNDO ARRIZABALAGA/EPA
One adviser said: “No doubt there was a bit of chumocracy involved, she’s married to a government minister after all. But she’s a powerful individual who cuts straight through and just gets things done. Plus she always had that lever of being able to call Boris and tell him what she needed.”
McCubbin’s knowledge of the manufacturing situation proved invaluable immediately. He realised there was a worldwide shortage of fill-finish capacity, the process of decanting vaccine into vials. He was also aware the Indian firm Wockhardt was just completing work on the expansion of its plant in Wrexham. Britain reserved its entire capacity for two years.
Dix arrived with an extensive contacts book that allowed him to book meetings with key figures in major firms around the world — from small innovators to Big Pharma chiefs.
“Clive brought a stash of industry knowledge and he has the style and ability to get people to talk — he was arguably the key ingredient in the whole equation,” said David Lawrence, chief financial officer at Valneva whose plant in Livingston is being expanded with public investment to make up to 200 million vaccine doses per year.
“Clive and Kate challenged the status quo — they showed how to make decisions at speed and at risk within the public sector framework.”
Weekend working
The pace at which they were prepared to work even caught industry by surprise. As the first meeting between the task force and Novavax came to an end discussion turned to when they would meet again.
“They said let’s talk again on Saturday and the Novavax people nearly fell off their chairs,” said an official. “In their experience no one in any government anywhere in the world had ever offered to meet on a Saturday.”
Weekend working and late-night meetings became the norm as the task force whittled down a shortlist of 23 potential vaccines to the handful they judged would work safely and be ready first.
Bingham found herself taking weekend calls from ministers including one from Alok Sharma while she was on horseback in the Welsh border hills, chasing a runaway horse which had galloped off among wild mountain ponies.
Initially ministers wanted to snap up the Moderna product but the task force insisted they sign first with the offering from Pfizer-Biontech.
“Officials were saying ‘the minister likes the look of Moderna’ but the task force was adamant that Biontech would be ready first — they were right,” said an adviser.
Another deal that was almost different was the Oxford-Astrazeneca partnership which was almost Oxford-Merck.
The university was in detailed talks with the US manufacturer before the scientists developing the vaccine became concerned that Merck was not committed to mass production on a cost-only basis for the world.
Matt Hancock, visiting a vaccine centre at Epsom race course, was concerned that vaccines made in the UK might go to other countries first
Matt Hancock, visiting a vaccine centre at Epsom race course, was concerned that vaccines made in the UK might go to other countries first
DOMINIC LIPINSKI/GETTY IMAGES
At ministerial level Matt Hancock, the health secretary, was also alarmed that manufacture of a vaccine developed in the UK might take place abroad and specifically in the US, where the Trump administration was snapping up supplies.
Hancock, who was influenced by the importance of a vaccine in the plot of the 2011 thriller Contagion, told LBC this week he was determined he “wasn’t going to settle for a contract that allows the Oxford vaccine to be delivered to others around the world before us”.
Red lines
The health secretary was one of the four ministers on the investment committee which made the final decisions on signing contracts with the pharma firms. Its meetings with the task force often ran late into a Friday night.
None of those contracts were straightforward. The advantage of being first to the table was countered by the demands from the vaccine makers that the UK government indemnify them against any future legal action in the event of serious side-effects.
Insiders say much credit in navigating the contract talks is due to Madelaine McTernan, 45, a former City lawyer seconded to the task force from UK Government Investments.
“It was absolutely a red line for every manufacturer that they wanted some form of statutory protection or, if not, some form of liability cover to provide them with confidence they could produce these new vaccines,” Nick Elliott, former director general of the task force, told the public accounts committee last month.
Bingham told the committee: “If we had not offered indemnities, we would not be securing vaccines. That was not a choice: either we agreed some level of indemnity with the different vaccine suppliers or we would not secure that vaccine at all.”
By contrast the European Commission’s decision to dig its heels in over legal indemnities during contract talks slowed down agreements and ultimately vaccine supply to the European Union.
Before any vaccine had received regulatory approval, Britain had signed contracts and committed £900 million up front. Work was also under way on the supply and distribution chain with complex arrangements especially required for the Pfizer product, which had to be transported from Belgium packed in dry ice at temperatures of minus 70C.
Secrets and security
Security was a constant concern as the supply lines were finalised. Vaccine shipments might be targeted by hackers, organised criminals or antivaxers to suit their various purposes. MI5, in the guise of the Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure, and GCHQ advised on security measures while police have been deployed to monitor distribution centres.
To maintain confidentiality around the UK’s favoured vaccines list, the first five candidates were codenamed after Royal Navy submarines: Audacious, Triumph, Astute, Ambush and Valiant. The names were chosen by Ruth Todd, commercial director of the Submarine Delivery Agency who was on secondment to the task force.
Todd was one of the officials who later worked for 36 hours without sleep to ensure the safe delivery from Belgium of a consignment of Pfizer vaccine after France imposed cross-Channel travel restrictions following the emergence of the Kent variant.
Lab technicians making the Astrazeneca vaccine at Oxford Biomedica
Lab technicians making the Astrazeneca vaccine at Oxford Biomedica
HEATHCLIFF O’MALLEY/GETTY IMAGES
The military “can do” approach was reinforced by personnel from 101 Logistics Brigade under Brigadier Phil Prosser who have been embedded, along with military medical teams, in the vaccine roll-out.
In Scotland, where Valneva acquired new premises in August and is close to beginning mass production, the company says the “can do” attitude has percolated through every part of the public sector.
“You don’t wake up and think ‘oh god I’m going to have to bang my head off a brick wall again today’,” said Lawrence, for whom it was a “no-brainer” to postpone his retirement plans at Valneva and continue to oversee the vaccine project.
“Whether it’s planning permission from West Lothian council or the Scottish government making sure we could move people from Vienna to Edinburgh for specific tasks, utility companies giving us priority, getting the right PPE on site with a couple of calls — it’s just so good to have everyone rowing in the same direction.”
Power struggle
In Whitehall, however, there are concerns that with the first objective of the vaccine task force achieved, people are starting to pull in different directions. Sources speak of tense meetings and angry emails as the outsiders who ran the task force lose control to the traditional civil service.
Whereas much of the task force success was down to nimble action by a small group, one virtual meeting scheduled for this week had no fewer than 285 invitees. Misunderstandings are amplified by remote working.
Bingham left her unpaid role at the task force at the end of last year and there is bewilderment that, after her achievements, she was not retained as an official adviser.
One industry secondee who has now left the task force said the return to business as usual was inevitable: “How long can you keep having a external group sitting in BEIS but with huge autonomy and direct access to the top? There has to be a return to the accepted way of working with more accountability and control.”
A lingering concern as the vaccine effort moves to its next objective is whether government has enough people with scientific backgrounds to impove the UK’s future pandemic preparedness, resilience and vigilance.
Bingham told parliament’s science and technology committee in November that a big lesson of her six months working across government was that the government needed “stronger scientific expertise and industrial experience”.
She said: “We do not have enough scientists. We do not have enough people from science, technology, engineering, mathematics or industrial backgrounds.”
The shortages of those skills and experience in the corridors of Whitehall must surely be addressed if the success of the Vaccine Task Force is to be sustained and developed.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:14 am
I believe Israel has the highly number of patents per capita in the world. It's a real hotbed of innovation and technology.Openside wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:46 pmThere are some very clever people doing amazing work out there. The advances that have been achieved over 10 months of concerted (in the main) global co-operation have been astounding.Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:03 pm I'll repost here. Good news... a cure as opposed to a vaccine from the dastardly laser shooting yids.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/israeli-covi ... 09164.html
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:22 am
Another country that has one set of rules within its borders and then fucks everyone else. Gertler and Steinmetz just the two latest bringing misery to Africa. The touted Covid cure was developed partly at the Sackler school of medicine in Tel Aviv. They were also staunch supporters of the apartheid regime. Did lots of sanction busting and supplied plenty of military tech in exchange for uranium.eldanielfire wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:14 amI believe Israel has the highly number of patents per capita in the world. It's a real hotbed of innovation and technology.Openside wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:46 pmThere are some very clever people doing amazing work out there. The advances that have been achieved over 10 months of concerted (in the main) global co-operation have been astounding.Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:03 pm I'll repost here. Good news... a cure as opposed to a vaccine from the dastardly laser shooting yids.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/israeli-covi ... 09164.html
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am
https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:28 am
So what you're trying to say is no Lions tour. Must be scared of the World Champions.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:30 am
The story about the SA strain and the AZ vaccine is another great example of the press's willingness to push any negative story and for our government to run scared of the story.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
A small study has found a decline in the vaccine's effectiveness in preventing mild and moderate symptoms in young patients. The findings had very wide confidence intervals so should not be regarded as conclusive.
The median age in the study was 31
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:58 am
Yeah we need more data on this as soon as possible...the lack of effectiveness in a young cohort is not a good thing as its likely to be worse in older people (and young people rarely get severe infections).zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:30 amThe story about the SA strain and the AZ vaccine is another great example of the press's willingness to push any negative story and for our government to run scared of the story.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
A small study has found a decline in the vaccine's effectiveness in preventing mild and moderate symptoms in young patients. The findings had very wide confidence intervals so should not be regarded as conclusive.
The median age in the study was 31
In the meantime I think operating on the precautionary principle might be justified.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:59 am
Yes, of course. Scared shitless. That's why it won't take place this summerFalseBayFC wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:28 amSo what you're trying to say is no Lions tour. Must be scared of the World Champions.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:53 am
Aviation is an industry the UK does very well, but given they haven't managed to get a third runway built I've always assumed their lobbying power is limited. Maybe not.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:58 am
Covid19 is a sneaky fucker. No way the first vaccines we developed are going to keep up with early virus mutations. We'll all just have to be patient and more than a bit lucky... 
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pm
27,000 vaccinated in Scotland on Sunday. Big dro from day before (over 50k) but 18k more than the previous Sunday.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pm
I don’t think you can draw any conclusion from it one way or the other.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:58 amYeah we need more data on this as soon as possible...the lack of effectiveness in a young cohort is not a good thing as its likely to be worse in older people (and young people rarely get severe infections).zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:30 amThe story about the SA strain and the AZ vaccine is another great example of the press's willingness to push any negative story and for our government to run scared of the story.tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:02 am https://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk ... cle/139164
New variant may undermine the vaccine's and the borders are wiiide open. Even once the hotel quarantine comes in next week it will just be for UK nationals - others will have to promise they will quarantine at 'home'
Who are these people travelling? Surely the reasons for essential international travel particularly to SA or Brazil must be tiny? What's the governments pathological need to at all costs allow flights? Does BAA have dirt on everybody?
A small study has found a decline in the vaccine's effectiveness in preventing mild and moderate symptoms in young patients. The findings had very wide confidence intervals so should not be regarded as conclusive.
The median age in the study was 31
In the meantime I think operating on the precautionary principle might be justified.
Which is true of much of the “data” we’ve been knee jerk reacting to in recent months.
Whereas large studies that conclude, for example, that severity of lockdown has no impact on our outcomes get completely ignored.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:47 pm
My parents (70s) are finally getting theirs tomorrow. Their peer group have been unimpressed by Nicola's performance on this, over promised and under delivered.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:47 pm
Large studies? What large studies? Considering every country is a data point, and it's extremely messy data given the variety in approaches, as well as general societal norms and ability to follow, not even accounting for the fact that numerous countries simply aren't testing enough etc etc, I can't see how you can possibly even have a large study, let alone one that can claim any reasonable accuracy.zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pmI don’t think you can draw any conclusion from it one way or the other.
Which is true of much of the “data” we’ve been knee jerk reacting to in recent months.
Whereas large studies that conclude, for example, that severity of lockdown has no impact on our outcomes get completely ignored.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:50 pm
A vaccine for the common cold ? No one said this was easy.
For perspective though, the variants are different by 12-400 changed proteins. The virus is made up of 17,000 plus amino acid strands, the variants are “tiny”.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:24 pm
I see South Africa have decided not to bother with the cheap AZ vaccine, because although it still seems very effective against prevent severe illness against the SA variants, it doesn't seem that effective against mild or moderate illness, so it's apparently not worth bothering with. Obviously, as SA have such huge vaccine reserves they can afford to use only the absolute best vaccines...
Sorry FalseBay, but this is the reason ZA aren't doing well with vaccinations, not other mean countries buying up doses, but a seemingly incompetent government.
Sorry FalseBay, but this is the reason ZA aren't doing well with vaccinations, not other mean countries buying up doses, but a seemingly incompetent government.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:30 pm
Not what I’ve heard from my parents and MIL who are more than happy. Probably depends partly on political persuasion I would imagine. Can’t agree with over-promised and under-delivered as, despite a slow start, we’re well on track to over-deliver on projected vaccination totals by mid Feb.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:57 pm
Being a really good few days from Scotland in terms of vaccinations.Tattie wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:30 pmNot what I’ve heard from my parents and MIL who are more than happy. Probably depends partly on political persuasion I would imagine. Can’t agree with over-promised and under-delivered as, despite a slow start, we’re well on track to over-deliver on projected vaccination totals by mid Feb.
However technically the stated target of a million shots by the end of Jan was massively missed with the goalposts moved without much of an apology.
But if the whole UK can get over 70s and the clinically vulnerable at least one shot by the end of the week and go on to get almost everyone done by Spring it doesn't matter and I don't even care if people in Scotland solely attribute their vaccination to st Nicola and the SNP
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:00 pm
My parents are long term Nationalists.Tattie wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:30 pmNot what I’ve heard from my parents and MIL who are more than happy. Probably depends partly on political persuasion I would imagine. Can’t agree with over-promised and under-delivered as, despite a slow start, we’re well on track to over-deliver on projected vaccination totals by mid Feb.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:02 pm
This seems to be a common thing.Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:47 pmLarge studies? What large studies? Considering every country is a data point, and it's extremely messy data given the variety in approaches, as well as general societal norms and ability to follow, not even accounting for the fact that numerous countries simply aren't testing enough etc etc, I can't see how you can possibly even have a large study, let alone one that can claim any reasonable accuracy.zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pmI don’t think you can draw any conclusion from it one way or the other.
Which is true of much of the “data” we’ve been knee jerk reacting to in recent months.
Whereas large studies that conclude, for example, that severity of lockdown has no impact on our outcomes get completely ignored.
Apparently Governments are keen to suppress studies that show the virus as no more dangerous than the common cold because they feel it's important to keep us in ineffectual lockdowns, heaven knows why.
Presumably it's part of a plan to ruin the economy and allow Bill Gates and the Illuminati to take over the World through micro-chip infused vaccinations and 5G.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:07 pm
Whether you agree with the SA government's decision to put the AZ vaccine rollout on hold or not, it was taken on the basis of scientific advice. AFAIK there simply isn't enough data for the efficacy of the AZ vaccine on preventing severe disease and death caused by the dominant SA variant.Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:24 pm I see South Africa have decided not to bother with the cheap AZ vaccine, because although it still seems very effective against prevent severe illness against the SA variants, it doesn't seem that effective against mild or moderate illness, so it's apparently not worth bothering with. Obviously, as SA have such huge vaccine reserves they can afford to use only the absolute best vaccines...
Sorry FalseBay, but this is the reason ZA aren't doing well with vaccinations, not other mean countries buying up doses, but a seemingly incompetent government.
Scientists who conducted a small-scale trial of the vaccine’s efficacy said it showed very little protection against mild to moderate infection, though they expressed hope that – in theory – it would still offer significant protection against more serious infection.
South Africa has halted the rollout of the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab, while a UK health minister indicated that an annual Covid jab could become the norm for many people as scientists work to stay a step ahead of the virus’s mutations.
Prof Shabir Madhi from the University of the Witwatersrand, who led the trial, said that, while the study was small, it was designed to focus on determining whether or not the vaccine had at least 60% efficacy against Covid to any degree of severity.
“The results that we now describe against the variant, the point estimate is 10%. Clearly, that is far off the 60% mark and, even if you had a larger study you are unlikely to get to a vaccine efficacy readout of even 40 or 50%,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:08 pm
My point was that studies, of which there are many, that go against the group think are ignored whilst we are bombarded with scare mongering based on thin evidence - like this SA study.Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:47 pmLarge studies? What large studies? Considering every country is a data point, and it's extremely messy data given the variety in approaches, as well as general societal norms and ability to follow, not even accounting for the fact that numerous countries simply aren't testing enough etc etc, I can't see how you can possibly even have a large study, let alone one that can claim any reasonable accuracy.zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pmI don’t think you can draw any conclusion from it one way or the other.
Which is true of much of the “data” we’ve been knee jerk reacting to in recent months.
Whereas large studies that conclude, for example, that severity of lockdown has no impact on our outcomes get completely ignored.
But if you want to be pedantic about adjective use .....
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
..... this study looks at 6,068 non-pharmaceutical interventions in 79 territories.
Conclusion, less disruptive NPIs can be as effective as more drastic ones. Which explains why Sweden is pretty much bang on the European average outcome with the least intrusive restrictions.
Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:10 pm
Nice strawmanning.Rinkals wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:02 pmThis seems to be a common thing.Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:47 pmLarge studies? What large studies? Considering every country is a data point, and it's extremely messy data given the variety in approaches, as well as general societal norms and ability to follow, not even accounting for the fact that numerous countries simply aren't testing enough etc etc, I can't see how you can possibly even have a large study, let alone one that can claim any reasonable accuracy.zt1903 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:45 pmI don’t think you can draw any conclusion from it one way or the other.
Which is true of much of the “data” we’ve been knee jerk reacting to in recent months.
Whereas large studies that conclude, for example, that severity of lockdown has no impact on our outcomes get completely ignored.
Apparently Governments are keen to suppress studies that show the virus as no more dangerous than the common cold because they feel it's important to keep us in ineffectual lockdowns, heaven knows why.
Presumably it's part of a plan to ruin the economy and allow Bill Gates and the Illuminati to take over the World through micro-chip infused vaccinations and 5G.