COVID Vaccine !

[nickyboy]

Not on www.england.nhs.uk/london/news/ so where, please?


Not zero. Enough that BBC regional news were quizzing Hancock about it this evening. Might well not be the case, but half a statistic is hardly conclusive disproof either.

NHS London spokesman quoted on BBC News website.

Anyway, are we really now at a point of having to "disprove" your conspiracy theory for which you still have provided zero evidence. This is bonkers. Tin foil hats a go go

 

[kingrollo]

At odds with the voters though. According to a poll in the guardian majority want take aways closed, nurseries closed exercise with another person stopped.

If Covid is as transmissible as we are led to believe - with intensive care beds almost full - I would support the above.

The news infections have come down to 48k - still way to high - but imo proves lockdowns work and the tiers system doesn't.

 

[lane]

The area which had the lowest tiers Isle of Wight and Cornwall now have a massive increase in cases

 

[PK99]

The area which had the lowest tiers Isle of Wight and Cornwall now have a massive increase in cases

From reports, folk on the island are putting the rise down to holiday homers and boozers going across when the Island was Tier 1 - ie against the rules.

 

[kingrollo]

From reports, folk on the island are putting the rise down to holiday homers and boozers going across when the Island was Tier 1 - ie against the rules.

That's another point against the tiers - it's almost impossible to police people going into a lower tier for a pint or two !

We just grin and bear this lockdown until we have high numbers of people vaccinated - and significantly lower infections.

The stop/start approach has been a disaster. If we get case numbers right down to summer levels - we can then stamp on new variants quicker.

 

[mjr]

NHS London spokesman quoted on BBC News website.

Anyway, are we really now at a point of having to "disprove" your conspiracy theory for which you still have provided zero evidence. This is bonkers. Tin foil hats a go go

Not zero evidence, but not much. But all you had to do is give the link instead of waving at a website of hundreds of pages a day.

If we get case numbers right down to summer levels - we can then stamp on new variants quicker.

Only if they get tracing working, which there seems little sign of.

 

[Cirrus]

Some averse reactions amongst the frail in Norway to the Pfizer jab, which are being looked into...
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n149

 

[winjim]

Interesting change in tone from the test notification. Changed from 'you did not have the virus' to 'is is not likely you had the virus', which has been bugging me for months. Conspiracy theorists keep talking about false positives and I try to point out that as laboratory scientists we know about that, but we do need also to acknowledge the potential of false negatives, especially in a population which may be self administering the test.

I don't know if this is a response to the vaccination program with its uncertainty regarding transmission, but to me it is a welcome change.

 

[Profpointy]

I just read an article that said that a Colorado GOP Congressman is not going to take the vaccine because he's worried more about the safety of the vaccine than he is about the side effects of contracting the virus. I find this interesting. The US is seeing deaths currently at a rate of 3,600 per day. There have been no confirmed deaths related to people receiving the Covid vaccine. So, this guy won't take the vaccine because he's worried about it being safe, yet it's proven that it is safe and more importantly much safer than not taking it and getting Covid. I'd say this guy should be thrown out of office, not for refusing to take the vaccine, but because he's shown a complete lack of critical reasoning skills, making him nothing short of an imbecile.

Given the political leaders popular in the US being an imbecile is hardly a disadvantage

 

[tom73]

The government look to be playing very loosely with what they see as when people have been vaccinated.
Most of the talk of when more people will have been vaccinated turns out to mean 1st dose. Though that’s better than nothing it’s not the same thing by a long way.

 

[Unkraut]

I was just looking at some news and in the first care home in Rheinland-Pfalz to start the programme they have started to do the second injection, exactly three weeks after the first. They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected. In fact the first to be injected, a lady of 90 became infected. She came through though, so it it reckoned that one injection does at least give some protection against the illness being severe, even though it doesn't necessarily protect against subsequent infection.

This is the Biontech stuff, and it looks like the manufacturer's instructions are going to followed rather than vaccinating more people and delaying the second dose.

 

[DaveReading]

I was just looking at some news and in the first care home in Rheinland-Pfalz to start the programme they have started to do the second injection, exactly three weeks after the first. They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected. In fact the first to be injected, a lady of 90 became infected. She came through though, so it it reckoned that one injection does at least give some protection against the illness being severe, even though it doesn't necessarily protect against subsequent infection.

Isn't the incubation period for the virus around a couple of weeks?

That would mean that someone found to be infected 3 weeks after the first vaccination had actually caught Covid in the first few days after the jab (or perhaps even beforehand).

That's consistent with what we're being told - that immunity takes a few weeks to build up.

 

[Ajax Bay]

If the virus is allowed to rip enough people in lower priority groups could overwhelm the NHS even if they don't die.

I suggest the statistics (lower priority groups = under 50s without other frailties) do not support this pessimistic possibility.

They have discovered that some of those injected have subsequently become infected.
This is the Biontech stuff, and it looks like the manufacturer's instructions are going to followed rather than vaccinating more people and delaying the second dose.

In the early days after the first dose, the immunity/resistance will not be present so it would be surprising (statistically) if people did NOT become infected, say in the first 12 days. But after that the trials suggest both increasing immunity and less severe symptoms if infected (and recall the 90% effective corollary: 10% ineffective).
On increasing the delay between doses to allow, in the first two months, twice as many people to be vaccinated (with one dose) and afford 70+% efficacy for the 80+% most likely to die, I think the judgement call by the UK JCVI is the right one. I understand the 'stick to the trial' evidence/protocol - and there may be legal issues/risks in some countries more than others (and of course there's history baggage around in various countries too), but on the balance of risk/benefit, content (happy even) that UK has grasped that nettle and is squeezing the juice. By mid March when the the second doses will need to be rolled out, the manufacturing and supply chains and systems will be (even) better, so that can be done concurrently with keeping the first dose rate of vaccination going for the under 50s.
Oh, and 'thank you' @midlife - here's the Marsh Family 'Have the New Jab' video for you (and all).
https://youtube.be/fn3KWM1kuAw

 

[lane]

That was rather the point. They should have learned from "fark business" at least enough not to publish "fark London for electing Kahn" if that is a policy decision.

It's funny where I live people are convinced London gets preferential treatment in absolutely everything.

 

[lane]

I suggest the statistics (lower priority groups = under 50s without other frailties) do not support this pessimistic possibility.

In the early days after the first dose, the immunity/resistance will not be present so it would be surprising (statistically) if people did NOT become infected, say in the first 12 days. But after that the trials suggest both increasing immunity and less severe symptoms if infected (and recall the 90% effective corollary: 10% ineffective).
On increasing the delay between doses to allow, in the first two months, twice as many people to be vaccinated (with one dose) and afford 70+% efficacy for the 80+% most likely to die, I think the judgement call by the UK JCVI is the right one. I understand the 'stick to the trial' evidence/protocol - and there may be legal issues/risks in some countries more than others (and of course there's history baggage around in various countries too), but on the balance of risk/benefit, content (happy even) that UK has grasped that nettle and is squeezing the juice. By mid March when the the second doses will need to be rolled out, the manufacturing and supply chains and systems will be (even) better, so that can be done concurrently with keeping the first dose rate of vaccination going for the under 50s.
Oh, and 'thank you' @midlife - here's the Marsh Family 'Have the New Jab' video for you (and all).
https://youtube.be/fn3KWM1kuAw

Just read think it was 25% of admissions are under 55 and they are in hospital longer so yes we will need restrictions to stop them overwhelm ING the NHS.