Page 258 of 438
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:52 pm
by mik
Interesting:
https://apple.news/AKkY0pq8sRlG9lUi32V0lVw
Something from this report I had never considered:
“ Listed US gun makers also lost (share) value as vaccine progress was seen as making social unrest less likely.”

Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:53 pm
by Explosive Newt
GG. wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 10:53 am
I don't understand this point personally. Surely those vaccinated were subsequently tested for whether they were producing the virus and not just that they became asymptomatic and therefore become effectively carriers?
I'm wondering whether is more bullshit of the kind where supposedly having had the virus and lived didn't mean you were immune (which is a matter of biological fact).
This is one problem with all the press releases before we have actual published data: something that has been a problem with science throughout the pandemic as we're so thirsty for knowledge. The trial defined a "case" of covid as one or more symptoms AND a positive swab. The Oxford vaccine trial does weekly swabs in all participants (symptomatic or otherwise) but I am not sure whether the Pfizer one does this - scrutinising what info there is on the protocol here
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728 I can't tell if they do or don't but antibody levels are part of the secondary endpoint so that will shed some light on asymptomatic infections.
Will have a chance to look if there is a published protocol later, I can't see one just now.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:59 pm
by Swervin_Mervin
I was trying to find an answer to this earlier as well and couldn't in the main reporting.
As an aside there was an article citing that the results of the (I think) Ph2 trials of the AZ/Oxford vaccine found immunity in 90% of those vaccinated after 1 jab, and 100% after 2 jabs. Again not sure how "immunity" is defined though.
Ther's still a lot of press (as you'd expect) about the Pfizer vaccine, but if I was a betting man I'd be putting a tenner on the AZ/Oxford vaccine as the first in any sort of mass roll out in the UK. For a start it won't have the cold chain storage requirements which you would think would have some limiting effect for the mass distribution of hte Pfizer one.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:11 pm
by GG.
Yeadon’s hypothesis expanded upon with some different angles thrown in as well. Click to read the full thread.
Doesn’t seem to be any other cogent explanation than approaching herd immunity to explain why deaths in London have not risen at all. Makes me angry that no one is bothering to ask why there would be such a regional difference. Working on the basis of statistics for England generally is a nonsense.
Very much hoping this is over by 2 December on that basis - we should be seeing signs of the tide turning on this secondary after echo by then I would have thought.
Would seem no need for people to be inoculated either but very likely invaluable work in the bag for the next time a novel Coronavirus comes along.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:11 pm
by dinny_g
Swervin_Mervin wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:59 pm
if I was a betting man I'd be putting a tenner on the AZ/Oxford vaccine as the first in any sort of mass roll out in the UK. For a start it won't have the cold chain storage requirements which you would think would have some limiting effect for the mass distribution of hte Pfizer one.
This
Whe way I’ve read the cold storage requirements, how the hell are you going to administer it to a care home patient safely???
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:24 pm
by Swervin_Mervin
There's a lot to be cynical about with regard to the very early, data-short, Pfizer announcement...
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:41 pm
by Simon
dinny_g wrote: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:11 pm
Swervin_Mervin wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:59 pm
if I was a betting man I'd be putting a tenner on the AZ/Oxford vaccine as the first in any sort of mass roll out in the UK. For a start it won't have the cold chain storage requirements which you would think would have some limiting effect for the mass distribution of hte Pfizer one.
This
Whe way I’ve read the cold storage requirements, how the hell are you going to administer it to a care home patient safely???
Apparently once out of cold storage it lasts in the fridge for 5 days.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:11 pm
by Simon
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2020 1:39 am
by dinny_g
Simon wrote: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:41 pm
dinny_g wrote: Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:11 pm
Swervin_Mervin wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:59 pm
if I was a betting man I'd be putting a tenner on the AZ/Oxford vaccine as the first in any sort of mass roll out in the UK. For a start it won't have the cold chain storage requirements which you would think would have some limiting effect for the mass distribution of hte Pfizer one.
This
Whe way I’ve read the cold storage requirements, how the hell are you going to administer it to a care home patient safely???
Apparently once out of cold storage it lasts in the fridge for 5 days.
Ok gotcha - early article I read spoke of industrial storage, many hospitals not having the required systems etc.
Good it’s not that restrictive
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:41 pm
by Broccers
I think wee Jimmy Kranks has lost her controlling mind
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:32 am
by Ascender
Broccers wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:41 pm
I think wee Jimmy Kranks has lost her controlling mind
I really struggle to understand some of the thinking behind their decision making process and I find it really difficult to not look at everything in a cynical way around their will for independence - i.e. "Are they doing x just to be different so they look better than Boris?".
Why weren't some areas locked-down earlier when it was clear the virus was out of control? Hard not to think it was politically minded.
And then you end up like some unionist conspiracy nutter. Its a slippery slope.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:42 am
by Ascender
Looks like my client is going to stand our team down soon until the New Year as the lockdown in England is just the latest in a long line of things making it difficult to get staff cover for testing. I'll be grateful of the break, but one of the other guys was talking yesterday about what government assistance would be available if you're struggling.
The answer appears to be none thanks to the recent IR35 nonsense. This client will no longer employ PSCs due to the on, off, on, delayed new legislation, so the majority are working through umbrella companies now which in theory makes us employees. But not enough of an employee to qualify for furlough - umbrellas aren't doing it and the client doesn't have to.
We're self-employed, but not self-employed enough to qualify for assistance as someone who is self-employed.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:06 pm
by John
I’ve had my first test this week as part of a study/survey we’ve been asked to take part in for 16 weeks. The throat bit isn’t too nice and was pretty difficult to do yourself at the first attempt, nose was no problem though.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:21 am
by Explosive Newt
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 am
by jamcg
I’m amazed at how many people I’ve heard say that they won’t have the vaccine, I even know people whose method to avoid self isolation for 2 weeks is to just avoid having a test!
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:32 am
by Broccers
jamcg wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 am
I even know people whose method to avoid self isolation for 2 weeks is to just avoid having a test!
I can see why. Its a stupid amount of time with no evidence it needs to be that long.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:51 am
by duncs500
70%... we backed the wrong horse.

Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:59 am
by Broccers
duncs500 wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:51 am
70%... we backed the wrong horse.
Its not 70 but 90 if full then half dose.
Am I alone in wondering how they will spin the future figures when these are released on the masses. Imagine if they made no impact at all on deaths.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:41 am
by duncs500
Broccers wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:59 am
duncs500 wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:51 am
70%... we backed the wrong horse.
Its not 70 but 90 if full then half dose.
I believe there is
some evidence that this may be true, but not really certain.
I was being somewhat facetious as I know the Oxford vaccine is considerably cheaper and easier to handle, so is in many ways a bigger deal in terms of the worldwide view.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:03 am
by Simon
Interesting article on Sky News
here detailing how it's funded and that AZ won't actually make a profit on it until the pandemic is over.