Coronavirus outbreak

[Edwardoka]

It's the delivery bit I'm worried about.

It's no mean task actually getting it in the arms of millions of people. A task that is non-optimally performed every year with the flu vaccine.

Wendover made a very good video about the logistics chain:

 

[cookiemonster]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...wn-how-many-contacts-not-traced-says-minister

How the hell can 16,000 cases go 'missing?'

16 or even 116 I can understand but the population of a small town?

And no-one has an answer as to how this happened.

 

[tom73]

She has a strong background in managing biotechnology research, development and delivery. Yes, that is in private industry but she will not be actually developing the drugs.....there are experts for that. Her responsibility will be involvement in the development and delivery programme, under the control and management of the government.

n

We already have experienced NHS staff who know how to set up and deliver a vaccination program.
They've been running them for years equally we have plenty of qualified world leading professionals who can lead this.
But just hand it over to someone from the private sector best all round after all they have a great track recored.
Delivering high class and value for money public service.

 

[midlife]

The error was due to some Data file sizes being too big and rejected

 

[classic33]

Turkeys being placed on diets, and face the chop earlier, under the "Rule of six"

https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/04/turk...ize-birds-for-rule-of-six-christmas-13369403/

 

[roubaixtuesday]

The error was due to some Data file sizes being too big and rejected

World beating.

 

[Rusty Nails]

We already have experienced NHS staff who know how to set up and deliver a vaccination program.
They've been running them for years equally we have plenty of qualified world leading professionals who can lead this.
But just hand it over to someone from the private sector best all round after all they have a great track recored.
Delivering high class and value for money public service.

I don't care whether it is managed by someone with a private or public/NHS background, as long as it is implemented and delivered effectively and state funds are not ripped off.

Medicine relies on a mix of private and public bodies for the discovery/development and manufacture of new drugs.

The public services, including the NHS, are bureacracies that are not exactly known for the timely development and introduction of major new systems. Yes, the NHS coped well with the initial phases of the virus, but at what cost in human lives in other parts of its diagnostic and treatment services. It is by no means perfect.

 

[tom73]

It's been mentioned a number of times by Kate Bingham, the government and their advisors about the not the whole population. This is also blindingly obvious from statements the government has made about securing vaccines.

This comment is more worrying as it suggests the government have made their mind up and the evidence on how effective vaccines (plural) are is very much unsettled (the government may have some info about how particular ones seem to be doing).

Short of further research about the immune system and interferons and particular antibodies/auto-antibodies as mentioned recently with a mass test, it is going to be difficult to decide who has it, but there is a lot of data for the government to make an informed choice.

When the time comes the government will have to be open and honest about who gets the vaccine and why and it's drawbacks.

E.g. completely made up numbers. But for some of the vaccines the profile may be something like
over 85s protects 30% of patients
65-84 protects 50% of patients
50-64 protects 65% of patients
40-49 protects 85% of patients
18-39 protects 90% of patients, another 9% register no symptoms and are less infectious

and then it'll depend on treatments available at the time and what vaccines are available at what time. It's not infeasible that one of the first available vaccines is terrible at protecting older patients but fantastic in younger patients. What do you do then?

Rather stupidly it may have to be rowed back upon as with around 20 million more than just those very at risk it may be decided say it's a good idea vaccinating first year university students or people that live in very high density housing.

You're right it has just not in the mass media you get to point of shutting down at times when government and their advisors get going.
I don't see much either being talked about just what issues will come when a vaccine has come along. Or who get's what and when some unpopular clinically lead choices will have to be made. Just talking up how good trials are going is not going to help anyone. A open public debate needs to start now. Some may well not work from the start or months down the line it's not going to be a perfect golden egg.
Going what's popular won't help at some point equal weight will have to go to once at risk and ones who pose the biggest risk to other.
Social need will have to come into play at some point which won't sit nicely with some.

Get the stuff into arm will be massive task and will not happen quickly. Again government is not being open about it and admitting it's not going to be easy or quick to get. Just the admin will take a massive effort under normal conditions.
As for the jabs Mrs 73 can do about 50 jabs an hour normally. With all the covid conditions even setting up a queue is not easy then add in the PPE That 50 rate soon drops she thinks to about less than 1/2 if she's lucky. That's assuming everyone is able to get have it and leave and no-one need's to have a few minutes to rest up.

 

[tom73]

I don't care whether it is managed by someone with a private or public/NHS background, as long as it is implemented and delivered effectively and state funds are not ripped off.

Medicine relies on a mix of private and public bodies for the discovery/development and manufacture of new drugs.

The public services, including the NHS, are bureacracies that are not exactly known for the timely development and introduction of major new systems. Yes, the NHS coped well with the initial phases of the virus, but at what cost in human lives in other parts of its diagnostic and treatment services. It is by no means perfect.

That was not down to bureacracies that's down to capacity and staffing which can't be magically made but comes from good funding and investment. Which we have for too long not been willing to do.
Do you know how much of a rip off drug companies are and how much they've cream off the NHS ?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

the government may have some info about how particular ones seem to be doing

Unlikely there's any inside info as the key trials are blinded.

 

[Rusty Nails]

That was not down to bureacracies that's down to capacity and staffing which can't be magically made but comes from good funding and investment. Which we have for too long not been willing to do.
Do you know how much of a rip off drug companies are and how much they've cream off the NHS ?

The fact that things like cancer and other serious treatments suffered was not just down to staffing levels, but also about organisational decisions and priorities set by top managers and the government. Lots of people with non Covid related illnesses are still suffering from those decisions some 5/6 months after the initial rush.

Yes, the profits of big drug companies are too high.

 

[mjr]

The error was due to some Data file sizes being too big and rejected

Where "data file sizes being too big" means "Excel spreadsheet reached maximum number of columns", if the Twitter rumours are to be believed. So far, the primary source seems to be the Daily Mail, so I'm not confident to call them that stupid yet. It's pretty stupid not to have any upload verification and error handling on something as important as this, though.

If this is true, it's not only world-beating, but also self-defeating:

View: https://twitter.com/standupmaths/status/1313055411285774336

 

[fossyant]

Knowing the NHS they are probably on an old version of Excel.

 

[mjr]

Knowing the NHS they are probably on an old version of Excel.

Not that old, apparently, because the pre-2003 Excel had a lower limit

 

[fossyant]

Not that old, apparently, because the pre-2003 Excel had a lower limit

Wow, was it that long ago (shows my age). I had to split one of my spreadsheets because of the limit !