Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:18 pm
Vaccine doesnt work then
Page 349 of 436
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:23 pm
July 19th - no surprise really
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:57 pm
Nope, next week for me.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:57 am
Re-booked my second Jab to Friday...
Quote fancy being fully covered now, especially as I'm going to start going into the Office
Holiday to Ireland, I'm guessing, is now Out. Going to organise Plan C (Static in Selsea) in the hope I can find Plan B (Self Catering by the sea) once it's 100% out.
Quote fancy being fully covered now, especially as I'm going to start going into the Office
Holiday to Ireland, I'm guessing, is now Out. Going to organise Plan C (Static in Selsea) in the hope I can find Plan B (Self Catering by the sea) once it's 100% out.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:42 am
They say the NHS is going to start contacting people to bring forward the second jab for over 40's to 8 weeks
I'm wondering if it's worth holding out, as according to them the protection is better if you can wait to 12 weeks.
I'm wondering if it's worth holding out, as according to them the protection is better if you can wait to 12 weeks.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:59 am
I think beyond 8 weeks the benefits become more marginal. THe main motivating factor for that timeframe initially was to get as many 1st jabs in arms. Given everyone under 40 is not getting the AZ jab, I'd imagine there'll be a fair amount of that vaccine swimming around in the system now. I haven't rebooked mine yet but probably will at some point this week.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:51 pm
As I have mentioned previously - there wasn't time to run multiple clinical trials - each manufacturer had to run a trial with the regime that they thought most likely to provide strong results. One chance to throw their hat into the ring, and since they correctly predicted that politicians and Joseph Public would focus almost entirely on the % effectiveness from the trial population and then state them as fact (without any statistical confidence intervals etc).... the majority went with a trial based around a 2-dose regime.
It could be that some of the vaccines actually achieve 99.999% of their final effectivity after only a single dose. Or they could be only 12.7958% of their final effectiveness following the first dose only.
It could be that separating your AZ jabs by precisely 3months, 9 days, 8hrs, 3mins and 27seconds will give you eternal life.
Its all speculation. The only things we can make judgement on are the results achieved based on the regime that was submitted for trial.
It could be that some of the vaccines actually achieve 99.999% of their final effectivity after only a single dose. Or they could be only 12.7958% of their final effectiveness following the first dose only.
It could be that separating your AZ jabs by precisely 3months, 9 days, 8hrs, 3mins and 27seconds will give you eternal life.
Its all speculation. The only things we can make judgement on are the results achieved based on the regime that was submitted for trial.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:03 pm
Had no trouble bringing our 2nd AZ jabs forward from the end of July to near the start which is good.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:38 pm
You aren't implying that there might have been a lack of testing are you Mik?mik wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:51 pm As I have mentioned previously - there wasn't time to run multiple clinical trials - each manufacturer had to run a trial with the regime that they thought most likely to provide strong results. One chance to throw their hat into the ring, and since they correctly predicted that politicians and Joseph Public would focus almost entirely on the % effectiveness from the trial population and then state them as fact (without any statistical confidence intervals etc).... the majority went with a trial based around a 2-dose regime.
It could be that some of the vaccines actually achieve 99.999% of their final effectivity after only a single dose. Or they could be only 12.7958% of their final effectiveness following the first dose only.
It could be that separating your AZ jabs by precisely 3months, 9 days, 8hrs, 3mins and 27seconds will give you eternal life.
Its all speculation. The only things we can make judgement on are the results achieved based on the regime that was submitted for trial.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:58 pm
I am not.drcarlos wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:38 pmYou aren't implying that there might have been a lack of testing are you Mik?mik wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:51 pm As I have mentioned previously - there wasn't time to run multiple clinical trials - each manufacturer had to run a trial with the regime that they thought most likely to provide strong results. One chance to throw their hat into the ring, and since they correctly predicted that politicians and Joseph Public would focus almost entirely on the % effectiveness from the trial population and then state them as fact (without any statistical confidence intervals etc).... the majority went with a trial based around a 2-dose regime.
It could be that some of the vaccines actually achieve 99.999% of their final effectivity after only a single dose. Or they could be only 12.7958% of their final effectiveness following the first dose only.
It could be that separating your AZ jabs by precisely 3months, 9 days, 8hrs, 3mins and 27seconds will give you eternal life.
Its all speculation. The only things we can make judgement on are the results achieved based on the regime that was submitted for trial.
I made the analogy with Porsche N-rated tyres before.
The Michelin Hypersport 4SS4S released next year may be the best tyre for every 911 in history, but regardless of that Porsche would not award an N-rating until they had tested it, and loads of people won’t fit them for fear of insurance issues.
Testing takes time. You can rely on your test results and the results from Health Authority assessments of the vaccines - it is a rigorous process. You can’t now rely on any other speculation - even if it later proves to be true.
Eternal life mate - follow the timing above!
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 3:26 pm
We've been done up like kippers (fish, not ukippers).
Embarrassing for those who never doubted it wasnt true tho, being wrong is never easy.
Embarrassing for those who never doubted it wasnt true tho, being wrong is never easy.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:30 pm
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:43 pm
Aye, who could've seen the rampant social media dumbfuckery around covid and the "MSM" culminating in that sort of bullshit.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:46 pm
Hold the front page - I think I agree.
MSM needs to hang with their wanky percentages and lack of perspective. Surely they cant all have been that stupid.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:14 pm
Wow, that lot want rounding up, loading onto a double decker and dropping off a cliff don't they?dinny_g wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:30 pm https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc- ... -tg593wt9d
Yikes...
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:45 pm
Still not clear what their problem with BBC is ?? 
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:46 pm
They reported the 'fake virus' so they must be complicit.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:48 pm
Good God almighty, surely not???
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:03 pm
Yep, it’s all a big control conspiracy between government and the press.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:10 pm
I know that eugenics is bad....
....but is it really that bad? I mean, we could use just a little bit of it, right?
....but is it really that bad? I mean, we could use just a little bit of it, right?